The structure of genetic and environmental risk factors for three measures of disordered eating

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 925-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. WADE ◽  
N. G. MARTIN ◽  
M. C. NEALE ◽  
M. TIGGEMANN ◽  
S. A. TRELOAR ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Disordered Eating ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Genetic Factors ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Shared Environment ◽  
Similar Degree ◽  
Psychiatric Interview

Background. The study explored the genetic and environmental risk factors for both the behaviours and attitudes characteristic of disordered eating.Methods. In three waves of data collection, information was collected from female twins regarding their eating and attitudes towards eating, weight and shape. The first assessment consisted of a self-report questionnaire (1988–9) with 1682 women. The second assessment consisted of a semi-structured psychiatric interview schedule (1992–3), completed by 1852 women, many of whom had completed Wave 1 assessment. The third assessment, with 325 women chosen from Waves 1 and 2 (1995–6), consisted of a semi-structured interview (the Eating Disorder Examination).Results. As only one twin pair was concordant for lifetime bulimia nervosa at Wave 3 assessment, ordinal measures of all assessments were used in a multivariate genetic analysis. Results indicated that additive genetic and non-shared environmental influences best explained variance in liability to disordered eating, with about 60% (95% CI 50–68) of the variance explained by genetic factors. Comparison with a model allowing for the effects of shared environment indicated genetic factors accounted for a similar degree of variance (59%, 95% CI 36–68).Conclusion. Liability to the development of the behaviours and attitudes characteristic of eating disorders is best explained by both environmental and genetic factors, with covariation between the three measures best explained by a single latent phenotype of disordered eating which has a heritability of 60%.

Undue influence of weight and shape: is it distinct from body dissatisfaction and concern about weight and shape?

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 819-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. D. Wade ◽  
G. Zhu ◽  
N. G. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Body Dissatisfaction ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Undue Influence ◽  
Diagnostic Criterion

BackgroundThree cognitive constructs are risk factors for eating disorders: undue influence of weight and shape, concern about weight and shape, and body dissatisfaction (BD). Undue influence, a diagnostic criterion for eating disorders, is postulated to be closely associated with self-esteem whereas BD is postulated to be closely associated with body mass index (BMI). We understand less about the relationships with concern about weight and shape. The aim of the current investigation was examine the degree of overlap across these five phenotypes in terms of latent genetic and environmental risk factors in order to draw some conclusions about the similarities and differences across the three cognitive variables.MethodA sample of female Australian twins (n=1056, including 348 complete pairs), mean age 35 years (s.d.=2.11, range 28–40), completed a semi-structured interview about eating pathology and self-report questionnaires. An independent pathways model was used to investigate the overlap of genetic and environmental risk factors for the five phenotypes.ResultsIn terms of variance that was not shared with other phenotypes, self-esteem emerged as being separate, with 100% of its variance unshared with the other phenotypes, followed by undue influence (51%) and then concern (34%), BD (28%) and BMI (32%).ConclusionsIn terms of shared genetic risk, undue influence and concern were more closely related than BD, whereas BMI and BD were found to share common sources of risk. With respect to environmental risk factors, concern, BMI and BD were more closely related to each other than to undue influence.

Major Depression and Generalised Anxiety Disorder

1996 ◽  
Vol 168 (S30) ◽  
pp. 68-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth S. Kendler
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Genetic Factors ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Generalised Anxiety Disorder ◽  
Increase Risk ◽  
Twin Models ◽  
One Year

In both clinical and epidemiological samples, major depression (MD) and generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) display substantial comorbidity. In a prior analysis of lifetime MD and GAD in female twins, the same genetic factors were shown to influence the liability to MD and to GAD. A follow-up interview in the same twin cohort examined one-year prevalence for MD and GAD (diagnosed using a one-month minimum duration of illness). Bivariate twin models were fitted using the program Mx. High levels of comorbidity were observed between MD and GAD. The best-fitting twin models, when GAD was diagnosed with or without a diagnostic hierarchy, found a genetic correlation of unity between the two disorders. The correlation in environmental risk factors was +0.70 when GAD was diagnosed non-hierarchically, but zero when hierarchical diagnoses were used. Our findings provide further support for the hypothesis that in women, MD and GAD are the result of the same genetic factors. Environmental risk factors that predispose to ‘pure’ GAD episodes may be relatively distinct from those that increase risk for MD.

Dimensional representations of DSM-IV Cluster A personality disorders in a population-based sample of Norwegian twins: a multivariate study

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 1583-1591 ◽  
Author(s):  
KENNETH S. KENDLER ◽  
NIKOLAI CZAJKOWSKI ◽  
KRISTIAN TAMBS ◽  
SVENN TORGERSEN ◽  
STEVEN H. AGGEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Twin Model ◽  
Limited Power ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Cluster A

Background. The ‘odd’ or ‘Cluster A’ personality disorders (PDs) – paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal PDs – were created in DSM-III with little empirical foundation. We have examined the relationship between the genetic and environmental risk factors for dimensional representations of these three personality disorders.Method. These personality disorders were assessed using the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality (SIDP-IV) in 1386 young adult twin pairs from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health Twin Panel. Using Mx, a single-factor independent pathway twin model was fitted to the number of endorsed criteria for the three disorders.Results. The best-fit model included genetic and unique environmental common factors and genetic and unique environmental effects specific to each personality disorder. Total heritability was modest for these personality disorders and ranged from 21% to 28%. Loadings on the common genetic and unique environmental factors were substantially higher for schizotypal than for paranoid or schizoid PD. The proportion of genetic liability shared with all Cluster A disorders was estimated at 100, 43 and 26% respectively for schizotypal, paranoid and schizoid PDs.Conclusion. In support of the validity of the Cluster A construct, dimensional representations of schizotypal, paranoid and schizoid PD are all modestly heritable and share a portion of their genetic and environmental risk factors. No evidence was found for shared environmental or sex effects for these PDs. Schizotypal PD most closely reflects the genetic and environmental liability common to all three Cluster A disorders. These results should be interpreted in the context of the limited power of this sample.

Genetic and environmental risk factors in males for self-report externalizing traits in mid-adolescence and criminal behavior through young adulthood

2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 2161-2168 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. S. Kendler ◽  
C. J. Patrick ◽  
H. Larsson ◽  
C. O. Gardner ◽  
P. Lichtenstein
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Environmental Factors ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Genetic Risk ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Environmental Risks ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Equation Modeling

BackgroundExternalizing traits or behaviors are typically assessed by self-report scales or criminal records. Few genetically informative studies have used both methods to determine whether they assess the same genetic or environmental risk factors.MethodWe examined 442 male Swedish twin pairs with self-reported externalizing behaviors at age 16–17 years [externalizing traits (EXT), self-reported delinquency (SRD), impulsivity (IMP), grandiosity (GRD) and callousness (CLS)] and criminal behavior (CB) from the National Suspect Registry from age 13 to 25 years. Multivariate structural equation modeling was conducted with Mx.ResultsThe best-fit model contained one genetic, one shared environmental and two non-shared environmental common factors, and variable specific genetic and non-shared environmental factors. The risk for CB was influenced substantially by both genetic (a2 = 0.48) and familial–environmental factors (c2 = 0.22). About one-third of the genetic risk for CB but all of the shared environmental risk was indexed by the self-report measures. The degree to which the individual measures reflected genetic versus familial–environmental risks for CB varied widely. GRD and CLS were correlated with CB mainly through common genetic risk factors. SRD and CB covaried largely because of shared familial–environmental factors. For EXT and IMP, observed correlations with CB resulted in about equal parts from shared genetic and shared familial–environmental factors.ConclusionsIn adolescence, measures of grandiose and callous temperament best tap the genetic liability to CB. Measures of antisocial behaviors better index familial–environmental risks for CB. A substantial proportion of the genetic risk to CB was not well reflected in any of the self-report measures.

scholarly journals The EnvIMS Study: Design and Methodology of an International Case-Control Study of Environmental Risk Factors in Multiple Sclerosis

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 173-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Magalhaes ◽  
Maura Pugliatti ◽  
Ilaria Casetta ◽  
Jelena Drulovic ◽  
Enrico Granieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Case Control Study ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Control Study

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system, often resulting in significant neurological disability. The causes of MS are not known; however, the incidence of MS is increasing, thereby suggesting that changes in lifestyle and/or environmental factors may be responsible. On this background, the Environmental Risk Factors in MS Study or EnvIMS study was designed to further explore the etiology of MS. The design and methodology are described, providing details to enable investigators to (i) use our experiences to design their own studies; (ii) take advantage of, and build on the methodological work completed for, the EnvIMS study; (iii) become aware of this data source that is available for use by the research community. Methods: EnvIMS is a multinational case-control study, enrolling 2,800 cases with MS and 5,012 population-based controls in Canada, Italy, Norway, Serbia and Sweden. The study was designed to investigate the most commonly implicated risk factors for MS etiology using a self-report questionnaire. Results/Conclusions: The use of a common methodology to study MS etiology across several countries enhances the comparability of results in different geographic regions and research settings, reduces the resources required for study design and enhances the opportunity for data harmonization.

scholarly journals The structure of genetic and environmental risk factors for fears and phobias

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 2375-2384 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. K. Loken ◽  
J. M. Hettema ◽  
S. H. Aggen ◽  
K. S. Kendler
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Genetic Factors ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Multivariate Statistical ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Co Morbidity ◽  
Blood Injection ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Phobic Stimuli

BackgroundAlthough prior genetic studies of interview-assessed fears and phobias have shown that genetic factors predispose individuals to fears and phobias, they have been restricted to the DSM-III to DSM-IV aggregated subtypes of phobias rather than to individual fearful and phobic stimuli.MethodWe examined the lifetime history of fears and/or phobias in response to 21 individual phobic stimuli in 4067 personally interviewed twins from same-sex pairs from the Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Disorders (VATSPSUD). We performed multivariate statistical analyses using Mx and Mplus.ResultsThe best-fitting model for the 21 phobic stimuli included four genetic factors (agora-social-acrophobia, animal phobia, blood-injection-illness phobia and claustrophobia) and three environmental factors (agora-social-hospital phobia, animal phobia, and situational phobia).ConclusionsThis study provides the first view of the architecture of genetic and environmental risk factors for phobic disorders and their subtypes. The genetic factors of the phobias support the DSM-IV and DSM-5 constructs of animal and blood-injection-injury phobias but do not support the separation of agoraphobia from social phobia. The results also do not show a coherent genetic factor for the DSM-IV and DSM-5 situational phobia. Finally, the patterns of co-morbidity across individual fears and phobias produced by genetic and environmental influences differ appreciably.

scholarly journals Environmental risk factors for psychosis

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-80 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Drug Abuse ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Growth Retardation ◽  
Genetic Factors ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Fetal Growth Retardation ◽  
Illness Onset ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The Individual

Genetic factors are clearly important in the etiology of schizophrenia, but the environment in which an individual's genes find expression is also crucial to the development of the illness. In this review of environmental risk factors for schizophrenia, we consider risks operating prenatally and perinatally, during childhood, and then later in life prior to illness onset Some of these risk factors have been well documented, for example, early hazards causing fetal growth retardation or hypoxia, and hazards nearer the onset of illness like drug abuse and migration. Others are much less certain. The importance of interaction between genetic and environmental risk is, however, undoubtedly important and there is emerging evidence for this from a range of sources. As the etiology of schizophrenia is unraveled, the picture becomes more complex, but also more obviously relevant to the plight of the individual patient.

scholarly journals Neuroticism and the Overlap Between Autistic and ADHD Traits: Findings From a Population Sample of Young Adult Australian Twins

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shin-Ho Park ◽  
Adam J. Guastella ◽  
Michael Lynskey ◽  
Arpana Agrawal ◽  
John N. Constantino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Young Adult ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Population Sample ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Environmental Risk Factors ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Environmental Correlations

Neuroticism, a ‘Big Five’ personality trait, has been associated with sub-clinical traits of both autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The objective of the current study was to examine whether causal overlap between ASD and ADHD traits can be accounted for by genetic and environmental risk factors that are shared with neuroticism. We performed twin-based structural equation modeling using self-report data from 12 items of the Neo Five-Factor Inventory Neuroticism domain, 11 Social Responsiveness Scale items, and 12 Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale items obtained from 3,170 young adult Australian individual twins (1,081 complete pairs). Univariate analysis for neuroticism, ASD, and ADHD traits suggested that the most parsimonious models were those with additive genetic and unique environmental components, without sex limitation effects. Heritability of neuroticism, ASD, and ADHD traits, as measured by these methods, was moderate (between 40% and 45% for each respective trait). In a trivariate model, we observed moderate phenotypic (between 0.45 and 0.62), genetic (between 0.56 and 0.71), and unique environmental correlations (between 0.37and 0.55) among neuroticism, ASD, and ADHD traits, with the highest value for the shared genetic influence between neuroticism and self-reported ASD traits (rg = 0.71). Together, our results suggest that in young adults, genetic, and unique environmental risk factors indexed by neuroticism overlap with those that are shared by ASD and ADHD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document