Age- and sex-specific associations between risk scores for schizophrenia and self-reported health in the general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The health correlates of polygenic risk (PRS-SCZ) and exposome (ES-SCZ) scores for schizophrenia may vary depending on age and sex. We aimed to examine age- and sex-specific associations of PRS-SCZ and ES-SCZ with self-reported health in the general population. METHODS: Participants were from the population-based Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2 (NEMESIS-2). Mental and physical health were measured with the 36-item Short Form Survey 4 times between 2007 and 2018. The PRS-SCZ and ES-SCZ were respectively calculated from common genetic variants and exposures (cannabis use, winter birth, hearing impairment, and five childhood adversity categories). Moderation by age and sex was examined in linear mixed models. RESULTS: For PRS-SCZ and ES-SCZ analyses, we included 3099 and 6264 participants, respectively (age range 18-65 years; 55.7-56.1% female). Age and sex did not interact with PRS-SCZ. Age moderated the association between ES-SCZ and mental (interaction: p = 0.02) and physical health (p = 0.0007): at age 18, + 1.00 of ES-SCZ was associated with - 0.10 of mental health and - 0.08 of physical health, whereas at age 65, it was associated with - 0.21 and - 0.23, respectively (all units in standard deviations). Sex moderated the association between ES-SCZ and physical health (p < .0001): + 1.00 of ES-SCZ was associated with - 0.19 of physical health among female and - 0.11 among male individuals. CONCLUSION: There were larger associations between higher ES-SCZ and poorer health among female and older individuals. Accounting for these interactions may increase ES-SCZ precision and help uncover populational determinants of environmental influences on health.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".