Childhood maltreatment and health in the UK Biobank: triangulation of outcome-wide and polygenic risk score analyses.

BACKGROUND: Childhood maltreatment is common globally and impacts morbidity, mortality, and well-being. Our understanding of its impact is constrained by key substantive and methodological limitations of extant research, including understudied physical health outcomes and bias due to unmeasured confounding. We address these limitations through a large-scale outcome-wide triangulation study. METHODS: We performed two outcome-wide analyses (OWAs) in the UK Biobank. First, we examined the relationship between self-reported maltreatment exposure (number of maltreatment types, via Childhood Trauma Screener) and 414 outcomes in a sub-sample of 157,316 individuals using generalized linear models ("observational OWA"). Outcomes covered a broad range of health themes including health behaviors, cardiovascular disease, digestive health, socioeconomic status, and pain. Second, we examined the relationship between a polygenic risk score for maltreatment and 298 outcomes in a non-overlapping sample of 243,006 individuals ("genetic OWA"). We triangulated results across OWAs based on differing sources of bias. RESULTS: Overall, 23.8% of the analytic sample for the observational OWA reported at least one maltreatment type. Of 298 outcomes examined in both OWAs, 25% were significant in both OWAs and concordant in the direction of association. Most of these were considered robust in the observational OWA according to sensitivity analyses and included outcomes such as marital separation (OR from observational OWA, ORo = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.29); OR from genetic OWA, ORg = 1.06 (1.03, 1.08)), major diet changes due to illness (ORo = 1.27 (1.24, 1.29); ORg = 1.01 (1.00, 1.03)), certain intestinal diseases (ORo = 1.14 (1.10, 1.18); ORg = 1.03 (1.01, 1.06)), hearing difficulty with background noise (ORo = 1.11 (1.11, 1.12); ORg = 1.01 (1.00, 1.01)), knee arthrosis (ORo = 1.13 (1.09, 1.18); ORg = 1.03 (1.01, 1.05)), frequent sleeplessness (ORo = 1.21 (1.20, 1.23); ORg = 1.02 (1.01, 1.03)), and low household income (ORo = 1.28 (1.26, 1.31); ORg = 1.02 (1.01, 1.03)). Approximately 62% of results were significant in the observational OWA but not the genetic OWA, including numerous cardiovascular outcomes. Only 6 outcomes were significant in the genetic OWA and null in the observational OWA; these included diastolic blood pressure and glaucoma. No outcomes were statistically significant in opposite directions in the two analyses, and 11% were not significant in either OWA. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the far-reaching negative effects of childhood maltreatment in later life and the utility of an outcome-wide triangulation design with sensitivity analyses for improving causal inference.

Pre-Pandemic Resilience to Trauma & COVID-19 Infection in Older Women.

OBJECTIVE: Prior work suggests psychological resilience to trauma may protect not only mental but also physical health. This study examined the relationship of pre-pandemic psychological resilience to lifetime trauma with self-reported COVID-19 infection and symptoms during the early years of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data are from 18,670 longitudinal cohort participants in the Nurses' Health Study II. Based on prior evidence that trauma and subsequent distress can increase infection risk and severity, and that psychological assets may offset this risk, we hypothesized higher versus lower psychological resilience to prior trauma would be associated with lower risk for COVID-19 infection. Pre-pandemic resilience was assessed via self-report between 2017-2019 based on self-reported lifetime trauma exposure and psychological health. COVID-19 infection and symptoms were self-reported on 7 questionnaires administered between May 2020 - October 2021, from which we derived a composite outcome measure of probable COVID-19 infection, defined as having 3+ COVID-19 symptoms (out of 9) and/or a positive COVID-19 test result at any single assessment. RESULTS: Multivariable regression revealed significant associations between higher pre-pandemic resilience scores and lower risk for probable COVID-19 infection, adjusting for socio-demographic and COVID-19-related risk factors (RR = 0.90 [95% CI 0.87, 0.93]). Considering subcomponents of the composite COVID-19 infection measure separately, pre-pandemic resilience was significantly associated with lower risk of reported symptoms (RR = 0.83 [95% CI 0.79, 0.88]), but not with a positive test result alone (RR = 0.96 (95% CI 0.91, 1.01]). CONCLUSION: Identifying protective factors for infection risk may help inform psychosocial interventions to improve health outcomes.

Polygenic risk for major depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, neuroticism, and schizophrenia are correlated with experience of intimate partner violence.

Research has suggested that mental illness may be a risk factor for, as well as a sequela of, experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). The association between IPV and mental illness may also be due in part to gene-environment correlations. Using polygenic risk scores for six psychiatric disorders - attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), bipolar disorder (BPD), major depressive disorder (MDD), neuroticism, and schizophrenia-and a combined measure of overall genetic risk for mental illness, we tested whether women's genetic risk for mental illness was associated with the experience of three types of intimate partner violence. In this cohort of women of European ancestry (N = 11,095), participants in the highest quintile of genetic risk for ADHD (OR range: 1.38-1.49), MDD (OR range: 1.28-1.43), neuroticism (OR range: (1.18-1.25), schizophrenia (OR range: 1.30-1.34), and overall genetic risk (OR range: 1.30-1.41) were at higher risk for experiencing more severe emotional and physical abuse, and, except schizophrenia, more severe sexual abuse, as well as more types of abuse and chronic abuse. In addition, participants in the highest quintile of genetic risk for neuroticism (OR = 1.43 95% CI: 1.18, 1.72), schizophrenia (OR = 1.33 95% CI: 1.10, 1.62), and the overall genetic risk (OR = 1.40 95% CI: 1.15, 1.71) were at higher risk for experiencing intimate partner intimidation and control. Participants in the highest quintile of genetic risk for ADHD, ASD, MDD, schizophrenia, and overall genetic risk, compared to the lowest quintile, were at increased risk for experiencing harassment from a partner (OR range: 1.22-1.92). No associations were found between genetic risk for BPD with IPV. A better understanding of the salience of the multiple possible pathways linking genetic risk for mental illness with risk for IPV may aid in preventing IPV victimization or re-victimization.