The Contribution of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage to Depressive Symptoms Over the Course of Adult Life: A 32-Year Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association between socioeconomic disadvantage and increased risk of depressive symptoms in adulthood is well established. We tested 1) the contribution of early exposure to neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage to later depressive symptoms throughout life, 2) the persistence of the potential association between early exposure and depressive symptoms, and 3) the contributions of other known risk factors to the association. Data were collected from the Young Finns Study, a prospective, population-based 32-year follow-up study that included participants aged 3-18 years at baseline in 1980. Participants were followed up with repeated measurements of depressive symptoms between 1992 and 2012 (n = 2,788) and linked to national grid data on neighborhood disadvantage via residential addresses. We examined the associations in mixed models separately for the 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-year follow-ups. Living in a disadvantaged neighborhood during childhood and adolescence was associated with a higher level of depressive symptoms in adulthood during all follow-up periods (β = 0.07, P = 0.001) than living in a nondisadvantaged area. Individual adulthood socioeconomic status mediated the associations. These findings suggest that living in a socioeconomically disadvantaged area during childhood and adolescence has a long-lasting negative association with mental health irrespective of family-related risks, partially due to socioeconomic adversity later in life.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".