A validation of the diathesis-stress model for depression in Generation Scotland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Depression has well-established influences from genetic and environmental risk factors. This has led to the diathesis-stress theory, which assumes a multiplicative gene-by-environment interaction (GxE) effect on risk. Recently, Colodro-Conde et al . empirically tested this theory, using the polygenic risk score for major depressive disorder (PRS, genes) and stressful life events (SLE, environment) effects on depressive symptoms, identifying significant GxE effects with an additive contribution to liability. We have tested the diathesis-stress theory on an independent sample of 4 919 individuals. We identified nominally significant positive GxE effects in the full cohort (R 2 = 0.08%, p = 0.049) and in women (R 2 = 0.19%, p = 0.017), but not in men (R 2 = 0.15%, p = 0.07). GxE effects were nominally significant, but only in women, when SLE were split into those in which the respondent plays an active or passive role (R 2 = 0.15%, p = 0.038; R 2 = 0.16%, p = 0.033, respectively). High PRS increased the risk of depression in participants reporting high numbers of SLE ( p = 2.86 × 10 −4 ). However, in those participants who reported no recent SLE, a higher PRS appeared to increase the risk of depressive symptoms in men (β = 0.082, p = 0.016) but had a protective effect in women (β = −0.061, p = 0.037). This difference was nominally significant ( p = 0.017). Our study reinforces the evidence of additional risk in the aetiology of depression due to GxE effects. However, larger sample sizes are required to robustly validate these findings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".