Background
Methods
Cohorts and participants
Measures
Childhood maltreatment
Psycho-cardiometabolic outcomes
Covariates
Statistical analyses
Main models
Sensitivity analyses
Results
Cohort | Study type | N | Mean age (SD) | Female (%) | CM (%) | Dep. only (%) | Card. only (%) | Comorbidity dep. and card. (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ALSPAC, mothers | PB | 3927 | 29.2 (4.4) | 100.0 | 10.8 | 16.7 | 2.5 | 0.8 |
ALSPAC, partners | PB | 2076 | 32.0 (5.1) | 0.0 | 7.9 | 7.7 | 3.9 | 0.8 |
GenR, mothers | PB | 3992 | 41.4 (4.5) | 100.0 | 10.9 | 5.2 | 2.5 | 0.3 |
HELIUS | PB | 20,820 | 44.2 (13.2) | 57.5 | 13.1 | 11.5 | 8.5 | 2.4 |
MACS | CC | 1677 | 35.3 (13.1) | 63.8 | 47.4 | 42.3 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
MIDUS | PB | 5988 | 46.7 (12.8) | 52.1 | 20.4 | 9.9 | 11.0 | 2.0 |
NEMESIS-1 | PB | 7060 | 41.1 (12.2) | 53.3 | 15.8 | 15.7 | 2.5 | 0.4 |
NEMESIS-2 | PB | 6469 | 44.3 (12.5) | 55.2 | 15.4 | 18.3 | 3.6 | 1.3 |
NESDA | CC | 2977 | 41.9 (13.1) | 66.4 | 32.8 | 58.9 | 3.3 | 5.6 |
NESDO | CC | 508 | 70.6 (7.3) | 64.8 | 29.1 | 47.8 | 8.1 | 22.6 |
SHIP-Legend | PB | 1882 | 57.2 (13.4) | 53.2 | 12.5 | 7.5 | 22.1 | 3.7 |
SHIP-Trend | PB | 4042 | 51.5 (15.3) | 51.6 | 10.9 | 9.2 | 19.3 | 4.9 |
UKBB | PB | 156,511 | 55.9 (7.7) | 56.6 | 11.3 | 21.7 | 4.3 | 2.0 |
Total | 217,929 |
Association of childhood maltreatment with depression, cardiometabolic disease, and comorbidity
Model specification | k | Outcome levels | n | Pooled OR [95% CI] |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main models | ||||
Binomial regressions | ||||
1. Association of childhood maltreatment with depressiona | 13 | No depression | 115,959 | ref |
Depression | 39,910 | 2.82 [2.40; 3.30] | ||
2. Association of childhood maltreatment with cardiometabolic diseasea | 13 | No cardiometabolic disease | 162,511 | ref |
Cardiometabolic disease | 15,421 | 1.34 [1.23; 1.46] | ||
2a. Outcome: diabetes mellitus1 | 12 | No diabetes | 168,943 | ref |
Diabetes | 7330 | 1.35 [1.19; 1.53] | ||
2b. Outcome: cardiovascular diseasea | 11 | No cardiovascular disease | 165,502 | ref |
Cardiovascular disease | 9216 | 1.39 [1.26; 1.54] | ||
Multinomial logistic regressions | ||||
3. Association of childhood maltreatment with comorbidity statusa | 9 | Healthy controls | 99,191 | ref |
Depression only | 34,360 | 2.68 [2.39; 3.00] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 9051 | 1.27 [1.18; 1.37] | ||
Comorbidity | 3565 | 3.04 [2.51; 3.68] | ||
4. Model 3 + adjustment of lifestyle factorsb | 9 | Healthy controls | 90,166 | ref |
Depression only | 30,544 | 2.57 [2.28; 2.89] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8181 | 1.25 [1.15; 1.36] | ||
Comorbidity | 3175 | 2.99 [2.46; 3.63] | ||
5a. Model 3 in males onlya | 7 | Healthy controls | 46,327 | ref |
Depression only | 10,402 | 2.92 [2.51; 3.40] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 5314 | 1.13 [1.01; 1.27] | ||
Comorbidity | 1582 | 2.90 [2.37; 3.53] | ||
5b. Model 3 in females onlya | 8 | Healthy controls | 49,571 | ref |
Depression only | 23,167 | 2.59 [2.30; 2.91] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 3438 | 1.41 [1.26; 1.57] | ||
Comorbidity | 1942 | 3.49 [2.79; 4.36] | ||
6. Model 3 with predictorsa = Physical abuse | 6 | Healthy controls | 88,347c | ref |
Depression only | 32,198c | 1.53 [1.41; 1.66] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8481c | 1.45 [1.24;1.71] | ||
Comorbidity | 3411c | 2.06 [1.78; 2.39] | ||
Emotional abuse | Healthy controls | 88,347c | ref | |
Depression only | 32,198c | 2.87 [2.56; 3.22] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8481c | 1.29 [1.11; 1.49] | ||
Comorbidity | 3411c | [2.16; 3.83] | ||
Sexual abuse | Healthy controls | 88,347c | ref | |
Depression only | 32,198c | 1.66 [1.56; 1.76] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8481c | 1.09 [1.01; 1.17] | ||
Comorbidity | 3411c | 1.60 [1.19; 2.15] | ||
7. Model 3 with cumulation of maltreatment types as predictora = 1 type (vs. 0 type) | 6 | Healthy controls | 88,347c | ref |
Depression only | 32,198c | 2.32 [2.22; 2.41] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8482c | 1.17 [1.07; 1.28] | ||
Comorbidity | 3411c | 2.37 [1.87; 3.01] | ||
2 or more types (vs. 0 type) | Healthy controls | 88,347c | ref | |
Depression only | 32,198c | 5.14 [3.93; 6.72] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 8482c | 1.83 [1.49; 2.26] | ||
Comorbidity | 3411c | 5.96 [3.59; 9.90] | ||
Sensitivity analyses—multinomial logistic regressions | ||||
8. Model 3 with outcome = comorbidity status based on strict definition of cardiovascular diseasea | 9 | Healthy controls | 101,203 | ref |
Depression only | 35,279 | 2.66 [2.37; 2.98] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 7030 | 1.28 [1.18; 1.40] | ||
Comorbidity | 2643 | 3.09 [2.54; 3.75] | ||
9. Model 3 with outcome = comorbidity status based on broad definition of cardiovascular diseasea | 11 | Healthy controls | 81,817 | ref |
Depression only | 28,612 | 2.84 [2.41; 3.35] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 27,178 | 1.11 [1.06; 1.17] | ||
Comorbidity | 10,364 | 3.00 [2.69; 3.36] | ||
10. Model 3 with outcome = comorbidity status based on medication intake in addition to reports of diagnosesa | 7 | Healthy controls | 78,989 | ref |
Depression only | 31,266 | 2.83 [2.27; 3.53] | ||
Cardiometabolic disease only | 16,896 | 1.13 [1.00; 1.26] | ||
Comorbidity | 6517 | 2.76 [2.28; 3.35] |
Sensitivity analyses
Discussion
Association of childhood maltreatment with (comorbid) depression and cardiometabolic disease
Differential effects of sex and maltreatment types
Strengths and limitations
Implications
Conclusions
Acknowledgements
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Cohort | Considerations |
---|---|
ALSPAC, mothers | Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees. Informed consent for the use of data collected via questionnaires and clinics was obtained from participants following the recommendations of the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee at the time. |
ALSPAC, partners | |
GenR, mothers | The Generation R Study has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Participants provided written informed consent. |
HELIUS | The HELIUS study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the AMC at the University of Amsterdam. All participants gave written informed consent prior study participation. |
MACS | All procedures were approved by the local Ethics Committees of Marburg (AZ:07/14) and Münster (AZ:2014-422-b-S), Germany according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Participants gave written informed consent prior study participation and received financial compensation. |
MIDUS | The study was approved by the Harvard ethics committee. Participants provided verbal informed consent. |
NESDA | The protocol of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety was approved centrally by the Ethical Review Board of the VU University Medical Centre and subsequently by local review boards of each participating center. All participants provided written informed consent. |
NESDO | The study protocol of NESDO has been approved centrally by the Ethical Review Board of the VU University Medical Center and subsequently by the local ethical review boards of the Leiden University Medical Center, University Medical Center Groningen, and the Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen. All participants provided written informed consent. |
NEMESIS-1 | The study was approved by the internal review board of the Trimbos institute, Utrecht. Respondents provided verbal informed consent according to the prevailing Dutch law of 1996. |
NEMESIS-2 | The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee for Institutions on Mental Health Care. After having been informed about the study aims, respondents provided written informed consent at each wave. |
SHIP-Legend SHIP-Trend | Written informed consent was obtained from all participants according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. SHIP-Legend and SHIP-Trend were approved by the Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald, Germany. |
UKBB | This research was conducted using the UK Biobank resource, application number 65769. The UK Biobank study was conducted under generic approval from the National Health Service, National Research Ethics Service (approval letter dated 17 June 2011, Ref 11/NW/0382). Participants gave full informed written consent. |