Interactions between genetic risk for 21 neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders and sport activity on youth mental health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood is a sensitive period where behavioral disturbances, determined by genetics and environmental factors including sport activity, may emerge and impact risk of mental illness in adulthood. We aimed to determine if participation in sports can mitigate genetic risk for neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders in youth. We analyzed 4975 unrelated European youth (ages 9-10) from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. Our outcomes were eight Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) scores, measured annually. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) were calculated for 21 disorders, and sport frequency and type were summarized. PRSs and sport variables were tested for main effects and interactions against CBCL outcomes using linear models. Cross-sectionally, PRSs for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and major depressive disorder were associated with increases in multiple CBCL outcomes. Participation in non-contact or team sports, as well as more frequent sport participation reduced all cross-sectional CBCL outcomes, whereas involvement in contact sports increased attention problems and rule-breaking behavior. Interactions revealed that more frequent exercise was significantly associated with less rule breaking behavior in individuals with high genetic risk for obsessive compulsive disorder. Associations with longitudinal CBCL outcomes demonstrated weaker effects. We highlight the importance of genetic context when considering sports as an intervention for early life behavioural problems.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".