Numerous observational studies have attempted to identify risk factors for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 disease outcomes. Studies have used datasets sampled from patients admitted to hospital, people tested for active infection, or people who volunteered to participate. Here, we highlight the challenge of interpreting observational evidence from such non-representative samples. Collider bias can induce associations between two or more variables which affect the likelihood of an individual being sampled, distorting associations between these variables in the sample. Analysing UK Biobank data, compared to the wider cohort the participants tested for COVID-19 were highly selected for a range of genetic, behavioural, cardiovascular, demographic, and anthropometric traits. We discuss the mechanisms inducing these problems, and approaches that could help mitigate them. While collider bias should be explored in existing studies, the optimal way to mitigate the problem is to use appropriate sampling strategies at the study design stage.
Summary Background Suicidal thoughts and non-suicidal self-harm are common in adolescents and are strongly associated with suicide attempts. We aimed to identify predictors of future suicide attempts in these high-risk groups. Methods Participants were from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a population-based birth cohort study in the UK. The sample included 456 adolescents who reported suicidal thoughts and 569 who reported non-suicidal self-harm at 16 years of age. Logistic regression analyses were used to explore associations between a wide range of prospectively recorded risk factors and future suicide attempts, assessed at the age of 21 years. Findings 38 (12%) of 310 participants with suicidal thoughts and 46 (12%) of 380 participants who had engaged in non-suicidal self-harm reported having attempted suicide for the first time by the follow-up at 21 years of age. Among participants with suicidal thoughts, the strongest predictors of transition to attempts were non-suicidal self-harm (odds ratio [OR] 2·78, 95% CI 1·35–5·74; p=0·0059), cannabis use (2·61, 1·11–6·14; p=0·029), other illicit drug use (2·47, 1·02–5·96; p=0·045), exposure to self-harm (family 2·03, 0·93–4·44, p=0·076; friend 1·85, 0·93–3·69, p=0·081), and higher levels of the personality type intellect/openness (1·62, 1·06–2·46; p=0·025). Among participants with non-suicidal self-harm at baseline, the strongest predictors were cannabis use (OR 2·14, 95% CI 1·04–4·41; p=0·038), other illicit drug use (2·17, 1·10–4·27; p=0·025), sleep problems (waking in the night 1·91, 0·95–3·84, p=0·069; insufficient sleep 1·97, 1·02–3·81, p=0·043), and lower levels of the personality type extraversion (0·71, 0·49–1·03; p=0·068). Interpretation Most adolescents who think about suicide or engage in non-suicidal self-harm will not make an attempt on their life. Many commonly cited risk factors were not associated with transition to suicide attempt among these high-risk groups. Our findings suggest that asking about substance use, non-suicidal self-harm, sleep, personality traits, and exposure to self-harm could inform risk assessments, and might help clinicians to identify which adolescents are at greatest risk of attempting suicide in the future. Funding American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Bristol National Health Service Foundation Trust, and the University of Bristol.
MotivationEpidemiological cohorts typically contain a diverse set of phenotypes such that automation of phenome scans is non-trivial, because they require highly heterogeneous models. For this reason, phenome scans have to date tended to use a smaller homogeneous set of phenotypes that can be analysed in a consistent fashion. We present PHESANT (PHEnome Scan ANalysis Tool), a software package for performing comprehensive phenome scans in UK Biobank.General featuresPHESANT tests the association of a specified trait with all continuous, integer and categorical variables in UK Biobank, or a specified subset. PHESANT uses a novel rule-based algorithm to determine how to appropriately test each trait, then performs the analyses and produces plots and summary tables.ImplementationThe PHESANT phenome scan is implemented in R. PHESANT includes a novel Javascript D3.js visualization and accompanying Java code that converts the phenome scan results to the required JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) format.AvailabilityPHESANT is available on GitHub at [https://github.com/MRCIEU/PHESANT]. Git tag v0.5 corresponds to the version presented here.
The extent of exposure to self-harm in others and the presence of psychiatric disorder most clearly differentiate adolescents who attempt suicide from those who only experience suicidal ideation. Further longitudinal research is needed to explore whether these risk factors predict progression from suicidal ideation to attempts over time.
Background: The impact of COVID-19 on mental health is unclear. Evidence from longitudinal studies with pre pandemic data are needed to address (1) how mental health has changed from pre-pandemic levels to during the COVID-19 pandemic and (2), whether there are groups at greater risk of poorer mental health during the pandemic? Methods: We used data from COVID-19 surveys (completed through April/May 2020), nested within two large longitudinal population cohorts with harmonised measures of mental health: two generations of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALPSAC): the index generation ALSPAC-G1 (n= 2850, mean age 28) and the parents generation ALSPAC-G0 (n= 3720, mean age = 59) and Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS, (n= 4233, mean age = 59), both with validated pre-pandemic measures of mental health and baseline factors. To answer question 1, we used ALSPAC-G1, which has identical mental health measures before and during the pandemic. Question 2 was addressed using both studies, using pre-pandemic and COVID-19 specific factors to explore associations with depression and anxiety in COVID-19. Findings: In ALSPAC-G1 there was evidence that anxiety and lower wellbeing, but not depression, had increased in COVID-19 from pre-pandemic assessments. The percentage of individuals with probable anxiety disorder was almost double during COVID-19: 24% (95% CI 23%, 26%) compared to pre-pandemic levels (13%, 95% CI 12%, 14%), with clinically relevant effect sizes. In both ALSPAC and GS, depression and anxiety were greater in younger populations, women, those with pre-existing mental and physical health conditions, those living alone and in socio-economic adversity. We did not detect evidence for elevated risk in key workers or health care workers. Interpretation: These results suggest increases in anxiety and lower wellbeing that may be related to the COVID-19 pandemic and/or its management, particularly in young people. This research highlights that specific groups may be disproportionally at risk of elevated levels of depression and anxiety during COVID-19 and supports recent calls for increasing funds for mental health services. Funding: The UK Medical Research Council (MRC), the Wellcome Trust and University of Bristol.
Background Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with later depression and there is considerable genetic overlap between them. This study investigated if ADHD and ADHD genetic liability are causally related to depression using two different methods. Methods First, a longitudinal population cohort design was used to assess the association between childhood ADHD (age 7 years) and recurrent depression in young-adulthood (age 18–25 years) in N = 8310 individuals in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). Second, two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses examined relationships between genetic liability for ADHD and depression utilising published Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) data. Results Childhood ADHD was associated with an increased risk of recurrent depression in young-adulthood (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05–1.73). MR analyses suggested a causal effect of ADHD genetic liability on major depression (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12–1.31). MR findings using a broader definition of depression differed, showing a weak influence on depression (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.13). Conclusions Our findings suggest that ADHD increases the risk of depression later in life and are consistent with a causal effect of ADHD genetic liability on subsequent major depression. However, findings were different for more broadly defined depression.
Key Points Question Is the prevalence of depression in pregnancy increasing across 2 generations of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children? Findings In this 2-generation cohort study, evidence was found showing that depression in young pregnant women is higher today than in the 1990s. Meaning The findings highlight the need for increased support for young pregnant women to minimize the potentially far-reaching effects of depression on mothers, their children, and future generations.
BackgroundPatients with opioid dependency prescribed opioid agonist treatment (OAT) may also be prescribed sedative drugs. This may increase mortality risk but may also increase treatment duration, with overall benefit. We hypothesised that prescription of benzodiazepines in patients receiving OAT would increase risk of mortality overall, irrespective of any increased treatment duration.Methods and findingsData on 12,118 patients aged 15–64 years prescribed OAT between 1998 and 2014 were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Data from the Office for National Statistics on whether patients had died and, if so, their cause of death were available for 7,016 of these patients. We identified episodes of prescription of benzodiazepines, z-drugs, and gabapentinoids and used linear regression and Cox proportional hazards models to assess the associations of co-prescription (prescribed during OAT and up to 12 months post-treatment) and concurrent prescription (prescribed during OAT) with treatment duration and mortality. We examined all-cause mortality (ACM), drug-related poisoning (DRP) mortality, and mortality not attributable to DRP (non-DRP). Models included potential confounding factors. In 36,126 person-years of follow-up there were 657 deaths and 29,540 OAT episodes, of which 42% involved benzodiazepine co-prescription and 29% concurrent prescription (for z-drugs these respective proportions were 20% and 11%, and for gabapentinoids 8% and 5%). Concurrent prescription of benzodiazepines was associated with increased duration of methadone treatment (adjusted mean duration of treatment episode 466 days [95% CI 450 to 483] compared to 286 days [95% CI 275 to 297]). Benzodiazepine co-prescription was associated with increased risk of DRP (adjusted HR 2.96 [95% CI 1.97 to 4.43], p < 0.001), with evidence of a dose–response effect, but showed little evidence of an association with non-DRP (adjusted HR 0.91 [95% CI 0.66 to 1.25], p = 0.549). Co-prescription of z-drugs showed evidence of an association with increased risk of DRP (adjusted HR 2.75 [95% CI 1.57 to 4.83], p < 0.001) but little evidence of an association with non-DRP (adjusted HR 0.79 [95% CI 0.49 to 1.28], p = 0.342). There was no evidence of an association of gabapentinoid co-prescription with DRP (HR 1.54 [95% CI 0.60 to 3.98], p = 0.373) but evidence of an association with increased non-DRP (HR 1.83 [95% CI 1.28 to 2.62], p = 0.001). Concurrent benzodiazepine prescription also increased mortality risk after consideration of duration of OAT (adjusted HR for DRP with benzodiazepine concurrent prescription 3.34 [95% CI 2.14 to 5.20], p < 0.001). The main limitation of this study is the possibility that unmeasured confounding factors led to an association between benzodiazepine prescription and DRP that is not causal.ConclusionsIn this study, co-prescription of benzodiazepine was specifically associated with increased risk of DRP in opioid-dependent individuals. Co-prescription of z-drugs and gabapentinoids was also associated with increased mo...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.