Familial risk factors to oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder: Parental psychopathology and maternal parenting.

AbstractBackgroundParental characteristics and practices predict borderline personality disorder (BPD) symptoms in children. However, it is difficult to disentangle whether these effects are genetically or environmentally mediated. The present study examines the contributions of genetic and environmental influences by comparing the effects of familial risk factors (i.e. parental psychopathology and borderline traits, maladaptive parenting, marital discord) on child BPD traits in genetically related (biological) and non-related (adoptive) families.MethodsData are from 409 adoptive and 208 biological families who participated in the Siblings Interaction and Behavior Study (SIBS) and 580 twin families the Minnesota Twin Family Study (MTFS). Parent characteristics and practices included parental psychopathology (measured via structured clinical interviews), parental BPD traits, parenting behaviors, and marital discord. A series of multi-level regression models were estimated to examine the relationship of familial risk factors to child BPD traits and to test whether children's adoptive status moderated the association.ResultsSymptom counts of parents' conduct disorder, adult antisocial behavior, nicotine, alcohol, and illicit drug dependence, and paternal BPD traits substantially predicted child BPD traits only in biological offspring, implying genetic transmission. Maternal BPD traits and both maternal and paternal conflict, lack of regard, and lack of involvement predicted offspring BPD traits regardless of the adoptive status, implying environmental transmission.ConclusionsParental externalizing psychopathology and father's BPD traits contribute genetic risk for offspring BPD traits, but mothers' BPD traits and parents' poor parenting constitute environmental risks for the development of these offspring traits.

Download Full-text

Risk factors for disruptive behaviours: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of quasi-experimental evidence

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038258 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (9) ◽

pp. e038258

Author(s):

Lucy Karwatowska ◽

Simon Russell ◽

Francesca Solmi ◽

Bianca Lucia De Stavola ◽

Sara Jaffee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Conduct Disorder ◽

Oppositional Defiant Disorder ◽

Experimental Studies ◽

Health Concern ◽

Disruptive Behaviour ◽

Oppositional Defiant ◽

Quasi Experimental ◽

Disruptive Behaviours ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionDisruptive behaviour disorders, including oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, are a common set of diagnoses in childhood and adolescence, with global estimates of 5.7%, 3.6% and 2.1% for any disruptive disorder, oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, respectively. There are high economic and social costs associated with disruptive behaviours and the prevalence of these disorders has increased in recent years. As such, disruptive behaviours represent an escalating major public health concern and it is important to understand what factors may influence the risk of these behaviours. Such research would inform interventions that aim to prevent the development of disruptive behaviours. The current review will identify the most stringent evidence of putative risk factors for disruptive behaviour from quasi-experimental studies, which enable stronger causal inference.Methods and analysisThe review will be carried out according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An electronic search of references published between 1 January 1980 and 1 March 2020 will be conducted using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Initial abstract and title screening, full-text screening and data extraction will be completed independently by two reviewers using Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)-Reviewer 4 software. Quasi-experimental studies in the English language examining the association between any putative risk factor and a clearly defined measure of disruptive behaviour (eg, a validated questionnaire measure) will be included. We will conduct meta-analyses if we can pool a minimum of three similar studies with the same or similar exposures and outcomes.Ethics and disseminationThe proposed review does not require ethical approval. The results will help to identify risk factors for which there is strong evidence of causal effects on disruptive behaviours and also highlight potential risk factors that require further research. The findings will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and through presentations at international meetings and conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020169313.

Download Full-text