MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089952864 · doi:10.1176/pn.42.20.0017

Can Heavier Babies Expect Better Mental Health?

2007· article· en· W2089952864 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joan Arehart-Treichel

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric News · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)Mental healthLow birth weightPsychiatryBirth weightPsychologyMedicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Clinical & Research NewsFull AccessCan Heavier Babies Expect Better Mental Health?Joan Arehart-TreichelJoan Arehart-TreichelPublished Online:19 Oct 2007https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.42.20.0017Fetuses that experience a favorable sojourn in the womb may be better protected against anxiety and depression later in life, a study in press with Biological Psychiatry suggests.The study was conducted by Ian Colman, Ph.D., of the University of Albert School of Public Health in Edmonton, Canada, along with colleagues at the University of Cambridge and University College London in England.A wealth of data links schizophrenia to unfavorable conditions in the womb, Colman and his colleagues noted. For example, low birth weight, as a proxy for prenatal damage, as well as more direct insults such as obstetric complications, have been shown to increase the likelihood of schizophrenia. So the investigators wanted to find out whether two indicators of an adverse womb environment—low birth weight and slow motor development after birth—might be linked with an increased risk of anxiety and depression later in life.Some 4,600 persons born in the United Kingdom in 1946 and representative of all native-born adults currently residing there served as subjects. These individuals were evaluated not only for birth weight, early motor development, and early speech development, but were also assessed five times between the ages of 13 and 53 for symptoms of anxiety and depression.The anxiety and depression evaluations at ages 13 and 15 were made by the subjects' teachers. The teachers rated the subjects as more than, the same as, or less than classmates on the following 11 attitudes or behaviors reflecting anxiety, depression, and internalizing emotions and behaviors: timid child, rather frightened of rough games, extremely fearful, always tired and washed out, usually gloomy and sad, avoids attention, very anxious, unable to make friends, diffident about competing, frequently daydreams in class, and unduly miserable or worried in response to criticism.The anxiety and depression evaluation at age 36 was made by trained research nurses using a short version of the Present State Examination, a clinically validated interview, to evaluate the frequency and severity of neurotic and affective symptoms during the preceding month.At age 43, the subjects used the Psychiatric Symptom Frequency Scale, a self-administered yardstick, to rate themselves on the frequency and intensity of common symptoms of anxiety and depression during the preceding year.Then at age 53, they completed the 28-item General Health Questionnaire, which focuses on the experience and impact of anxiety and depression symptoms during the previous month.Six Patterns IdentifiedColman and his colleagues then grouped the subjects based on anxiety and depression results into six longitudinal patterns. The largest group—45 percent of the sample—had few or no symptoms. The second group—34 percent—had repeated minor or moderate symptoms that were generally below the threshold for mental illness. The third group—11 percent—had few symptoms in adolescence, but had minor or moderate symptoms in adulthood. The fourth group—6 percent—had symptoms in adolescence but was mentally well in adulthood. The fifth group—3 percent—had few symptoms in adolescence, but had severe symptoms in adulthood. Finally, the sixth and smallest group — 2 percent—had enduring high scores indicating persistent or repeated severe symptoms as teens and adults.The researchers then looked for differences among the groups on birth weight, early motor development, or early speech development, taking factors that might skew results, such as gender, social circumstances in childhood, and stressful life events in childhood, into consideration.Average Birth Weights VariedAverage birth weights differed significantly among the six groups. Most notably, the group with few or no anxiety and depressive symptoms throughout the 40-year study period had the highest average birth weight (3.44 kilograms, or 7.75 pounds), whereas the group that had repeated severe anxiety and depressive symptoms had the lowest average birth weight (3.32 kilograms or 7.25 pounds).Furthermore, early motor development differed significantly among the groups. Those with few or no anxiety and depressive symptoms were, on average, the first to stand and walk—they started walking, on average, at 13.4 months—while those with repeated severe symptoms were the last to stand and walk—they started walking, on average, at 14.4 months.The six groups did not differ significantly on the age at which they began speaking.Thus, low birth weight and slow motor development may be harbingers of later susceptibility to anxiety and depression, while robust birth weight and rapid motor development may signal some protection against anxiety and depression.But only to a point, it seems. Although the researchers found that a birth weight up to 4.5 kilograms (10 pounds) was associated with less anxiety and depression later in life, they also found that beyond that birth weight, the relationship reversed—very large babies were in fact more likely to have depression and anxiety later.How birth weight and early motor development might influence later susceptibility to anxiety and depression is not known. But Colman and his team suspect that a less-than-favorable womb environment might alter a fetus's neurodevelopment and stress response, and these alterations in turn might set it up for "poor mental health across the life course."The study was funded by the Institute for Social Studies in Medical Care, U.K. Medical Research Council, Stanley Medical Research Institute, Leverhulme Foundation, Isaac Newton Trust, and U.K. Department of Health.An abstract of "A Longitudinal Typology of Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety Over the Life Course" is posted at<www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/bps/article/PIIS0006322307004362>.▪ ISSUES NewArchived

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric NewsSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207