Poor housing conditions in adolescence and adult health outcomes: an outcome-wide longitudinal approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While prior literature has documented the impact of housing quality on health, the long-lasting effects of poor housing conditions in adolescence on adult health remain understudied. This study employs an outcome-wide longitudinal approach to estimate the association between poor housing conditions in adolescence and a set of health outcomes in adulthood. METHODS: Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), a large-scale, nationally representative sample of US adolescents, were used. This study analysed 15 health outcomes encompassing physical and mental/cognitive health, and health behaviours. The Bonferroni correction was applied to adjust the significance level of multiple testing of the associations. RESULTS: After applying the Bonferroni correction, poor housing conditions in adolescence were associated with seven adult health outcomes. These conditions were particularly strongly and robustly linked to mental health issues, including depression, suicidal ideation and perceived stress. Additionally, poor housing conditions were related to physical health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease risk and self-rated health, as well as health behaviours such as smoking and unhealthy eating behaviour. CONCLUSION: Poor housing conditions during adolescence can act as an early risk factor for adult health, particularly mental health. These findings support the adoption of a life course approach and strengthen the case for housing interventions aimed at improving health outcomes.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".