Leveraging the Biology of Adversity and Resilience to Transform Pediatric Practice.

Advances in science are fundamentally changing the way we understand how inextricable interactions among genetic predispositions, physical and social environments, and developmental timing influence early childhood development and the foundations of health and how significant early adversity can lead to a lifetime of chronic health impairments. This article and companion article illustrate the extent to which differential outcomes are shaped by ongoing interactive adaptations to context that begin at or even before conception and continue throughout life, with increasing evidence pointing to the importance of the prenatal period and early infancy for the developing brain, the immune system, and metabolic regulation. Although new discoveries in the basic sciences are transforming tertiary medical care and producing breakthrough outcomes in treating disease, this knowledge is not being leveraged effectively to inform new approaches to promoting whole-child development and preventing illness. The opportunity for pediatrics to serve as the leading edge of science-based innovation across the early childhood ecosystem has never been more compelling. In this article, we present a framework for leveraging the frontiers of scientific discovery to inform new strategies in pediatric practice and advocacy to protect all developing biological systems from the disruptive effects of excessive early adversity beyond providing information on child development for parents and enriched learning experiences for young children.

Genes, Environments, and Time: The Biology of Adversity and Resilience.

Exposures to adverse environments, both psychosocial and physicochemical, are prevalent and consequential across a broad range of childhood populations. Such adversity, especially early in life, conveys measurable risk to learning and behavior and to the foundations of both mental and physical health. Using an interactive gene-environment-time (GET) framework, we survey the independent and interactive roles of genetic variation, environmental context, and developmental timing in light of advances in the biology of adversity and resilience, as well as new discoveries in biomedical research. Drawing on this rich evidence base, we identify 4 core concepts that provide a powerful catalyst for fresh thinking about primary health care for young children: (1) all biological systems are inextricably integrated, continuously "reading" and adapting to the environment and "talking back" to the brain and each other through highly regulated channels of cross-system communication; (2) adverse environmental exposures induce alterations in developmental trajectories that can lead to persistent disruptions of organ function and structure; (3) children vary in their sensitivity to context, and this variation is influenced by interactions among genetic factors, family and community environments, and developmental timing; and (4) critical or sensitive periods provide unmatched windows of opportunity for both positive and negative influences on multiple biological systems. These rapidly moving frontiers of investigation provide a powerful framework for new, science-informed thinking about health promotion and disease prevention in the early childhood period.

Early Childhood Adversity, Toxic Stress, and the Impacts of Racism on the Foundations of Health.

Inequalities in health outcomes impose substantial human and economic costs on all societies-and the relation between early adversity and lifelong well-being presents a rich scientific framework for fresh thinking about health promotion and disease prevention broadly, augmented by a deeper focus on how racism influences disparities more specifically. This review begins with an overview of advances in the biology of adversity and resilience through an early childhood lens, followed by an overview of the unique effects of racism on health and a selective review of findings from related intervention research. This article presents a framework for addressing multiple dimensions of the public health challenge-including institutional/structural racism, cultural racism, and interpersonal discrimination-and concludes with the compelling need to protect the developing brain and other biological systems from the physiological disruptions of toxic stress that can undermine the building blocks of optimal health and development in the early childhood period.

From Innovation to Impact at Scale: Lessons Learned From a Cluster of Research-Community Partnerships.

This article presents a description of how an interdisciplinary network of academic researchers, community-based programs, parents, and state agencies have joined together to design, test, and scale a suite of innovative intervention strategies rooted in new knowledge about the biology of adversity. Through a process of cocreation, collective pilot testing, and the support of a measurement and evaluation hub, the Washington Innovation Cluster is using rapid cycle iterative learning to elucidate differential impacts of interventions designed to build child and caregiver capacities and address the developmental consequences of socioeconomic disadvantage. Key characteristics of the Innovation Cluster model are described and an example is presented of a video-coaching intervention that has been implemented, adapted, and evaluated through this distinctive collaborative process.

Racial Disparities in Child Adversity in the U.S.: Interactions With Family Immigration History and Income.

INTRODUCTION: Childhood adversity is an under-addressed dimension of primary prevention of disease in children and adults. Evidence shows racial/ethnic and socioeconomic patterning of childhood adversity in the U.S., yet data on the interaction of race/ethnicity and SES for exposure risk is limited, particularly with consideration of immigration history. This study examined racial/ethnic differences in nine adversities among children (from birth to age 17 years) in the National Survey of Child Health (2011-2012) and determined how differences vary by immigration history and income (N=84,837). METHODS: We estimated cumulative adversity and individual adversity prevalences among white, black, and Hispanic children of U.S.-born and immigrant parents. We examined whether family income mediated the relationship between race/ethnicity and exposure to adversities, and tested interactions (analyses conducted in 2014-2015). RESULTS: Across all groups, black and Hispanic children were exposed to more adversities compared with white children, and income disparities in exposure were larger than racial/ethnic disparities. For children of U.S.-born parents, these patterns of racial/ethnic and income differences were present for most individual adversities. Among children of immigrant parents, there were few racial/ethnic differences for individual adversities and income gradients were inconsistent. Among children of U.S.-born parents, the Hispanic-white disparity in exposure to adversities persisted after adjustment for income, and racial/ethnic disparities in adversity were largest among children from high-income families. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous consideration of multiple social statuses offers promising frameworks for fresh thinking about the distribution of disease and the design of targeted interventions to reduce preventable health disparities.

Interventions to improve cortisol regulation in children: a systematic review.

Childhood adversity is associated with physiologic dysregulation across multiple biological systems; however, relatively little is known about whether these changes are reversible with intervention. The objective of this review was to examine evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to promote healthy cortisol regulation in children. We selected articles from English-language publications in PubMed and EBSCO databases through 2012. Two independent reviewers assessed articles against eligibility criteria. Eligible studies were randomized controlled or quasi-experimental studies designed to improve relationships, environments, or psychosocial functioning in children and examined cortisol as an outcome. We identified 19 articles. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies with regard to age, selection criteria, intervention design, cortisol assessment, and follow-up duration. Eighteen of the 19 articles reported at least 1 difference in baseline cortisol, diurnal cortisol, or cortisol responsivity between intervention and control participants. Importantly, however, there was remarkable inconsistency with regard to how the interventions influenced cortisol. Therefore, studies that included a low-risk comparison group (n = 8) provided critical insight, and each found some evidence that postintervention cortisol levels in the intervention group approximated the low-risk comparison group and differed from children receiving usual care. In conclusion, existing studies show that cortisol activity can be altered by psychosocial interventions. These findings are promising, not only because they indicate physiologic plasticity that can be leveraged by interventions but also because they suggest it may be possible to repair regulatory systems after childhood adversity, which could inform strategies for reducing health disparities and promoting lasting improvements in health.

Leveraging the biology of adversity to address the roots of disparities in health and development.

Extensive evidence that personal experiences and environmental exposures are embedded biologically (for better or for worse) and the cumulative knowledge of more than four decades of intervention research provide a promising opportunity to mobilize evolving scientific insights to catalyze a new era of more effective early childhood policy and practice. Drawing on emerging hypotheses about causal mechanisms that link early adversity with lifelong impairments in learning, behavior, and health, this paper proposes an enhanced theory of change to promote better outcomes for vulnerable, young children by strengthening caregiver and community capacities to reduce or mitigate the impacts of toxic stress, rather than simply providing developmental enrichment for the children and parenting education for their mothers.

An integrated scientific framework for child survival and early childhood development.

Building a strong foundation for healthy development in the early years of life is a prerequisite for individual well-being, economic productivity, and harmonious societies around the world. Growing scientific evidence also demonstrates that social and physical environments that threaten human development (because of scarcity, stress, or instability) can lead to short-term physiologic and psychological adjustments that are necessary for immediate survival and adaptation, but which may come at a significant cost to long-term outcomes in learning, behavior, health, and longevity. Generally speaking, ministries of health prioritize child survival and physical well-being, ministries of education focus on schooling, ministries of finance promote economic development, and ministries of welfare address breakdowns across multiple domains of function. Advances in the biological and social sciences offer a unifying framework for generating significant societal benefits by catalyzing greater synergy across these policy sectors. This synergy could inform more effective and efficient investments both to increase the survival of children born under adverse circumstances and to improve life outcomes for those who live beyond the early childhood period yet face high risks for diminished life prospects.

The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress.

Advances in fields of inquiry as diverse as neuroscience, molecular biology, genomics, developmental psychology, epidemiology, sociology, and economics are catalyzing an important paradigm shift in our understanding of health and disease across the lifespan. This converging, multidisciplinary science of human development has profound implications for our ability to enhance the life prospects of children and to strengthen the social and economic fabric of society. Drawing on these multiple streams of investigation, this report presents an ecobiodevelopmental framework that illustrates how early experiences and environmental influences can leave a lasting signature on the genetic predispositions that affect emerging brain architecture and long-term health. The report also examines extensive evidence of the disruptive impacts of toxic stress, offering intriguing insights into causal mechanisms that link early adversity to later impairments in learning, behavior, and both physical and mental well-being. The implications of this framework for the practice of medicine, in general, and pediatrics, specifically, are potentially transformational. They suggest that many adult diseases should be viewed as developmental disorders that begin early in life and that persistent health disparities associated with poverty, discrimination, or maltreatment could be reduced by the alleviation of toxic stress in childhood. An ecobiodevelopmental framework also underscores the need for new thinking about the focus and boundaries of pediatric practice. It calls for pediatricians to serve as both front-line guardians of healthy child development and strategically positioned, community leaders to inform new science-based strategies that build strong foundations for educational achievement, economic productivity, responsible citizenship, and lifelong health.

Protecting brains, not simply stimulating minds.

Curricular enhancements in early childhood education that are guided by the science of learning must be augmented by protective interventions informed by the biology of adversity. The same neuroplasticity that leaves emotional regulation, behavioral adaptation, and executive functioning skills vulnerable to early disruption by stressful environments also enables their successful development through focused interventions during sensitive periods in their maturation. The early childhood field should therefore combine cognitive-linguistic enrichment with greater attention to preventing, reducing, or mitigating the consequences of significant adversity on the developing brain. Guided by this enhanced theory of change, scientists, practitioners, and policy-makers must work together to design, implement, and evaluate innovative strategies to produce substantially greater impacts than those achieved by existing programs.

Building a new biodevelopmental framework to guide the future of early childhood policy.

Four decades of early childhood policy and program development indicate that evidence-based interventions can improve life outcomes, and dramatic advances in the biological and behavioral sciences now provide an opportunity to augment those impacts. The challenge of reducing the gap between what we know and what we do to promote the healthy development of young children is to view current best practices as a starting point and to leverage scientific concepts to inspire fresh thinking. This article offers an integrated, biodevelopmental framework to promote greater understanding of the antecedents and causal pathways that lead to disparities in health, learning, and behavior in order to inform the development of enhanced theories of change to drive innovation in policies and programs.

Neuroscience, molecular biology, and the childhood roots of health disparities: building a new framework for health promotion and disease prevention.

A scientific consensus is emerging that the origins of adult disease are often found among developmental and biological disruptions occurring during the early years of life. These early experiences can affect adult health in 2 ways--either by cumulative damage over time or by the biological embedding of adversities during sensitive developmental periods. In both cases, there can be a lag of many years, even decades, before early adverse experiences are expressed in the form of disease. From both basic research and policy perspectives, confronting the origins of disparities in physical and mental health early in life may produce greater effects than attempting to modify health-related behaviors or improve access to health care in adulthood.

Economic, neurobiological, and behavioral perspectives on building America's future workforce.

A growing proportion of the U.S. workforce will have been raised in disadvantaged environments that are associated with relatively high proportions of individuals with diminished cognitive and social skills. A cross-disciplinary examination of research in economics, developmental psychology, and neurobiology reveals a striking convergence on a set of common principles that account for the potent effects of early environment on the capacity for human skill development. Central to these principles are the findings that early experiences have a uniquely powerful influence on the development of cognitive and social skills and on brain architecture and neurochemistry, that both skill development and brain maturation are hierarchical processes in which higher level functions depend on, and build on, lower level functions, and that the capacity for change in the foundations of human skill development and neural circuitry is highest earlier in life and decreases over time. These findings lead to the conclusion that the most efficient strategy for strengthening the future workforce, both economically and neurobiologically, and improving its quality of life is to invest in the environments of disadvantaged children during the early childhood years.