Social determinants of health and epigenetic clocks: Meta-analysis of 140 studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social determinants of health are social factors that affect health and survival. Two of the most powerful social determinants are socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity; people with lower SES or marginalized race/ethnicity tend to experience earlier onset of aging-related diseases and have shorter lifespans. DNA methylation (DNAm) measures of biological aging, often referred to as "epigenetic clocks", are increasingly used to study the social determination of health. However, there are several generations of epigenetic clocks and it remains unclear which are most sensitive to social factors affecting health. Moreover, there is uncertainty about how technical factors, such as the tissue from which DNA is derived or the technology used to measure DNA methylation may affect associations of social determinants with epigenetic clocks. We conducted a pre-registered multi-level meta-analysis of 140 studies, including N = 65,919 participants, encompassing 1,065 effect sizes for associations of SES and racial/ethnic identity with three generations of epigenetic clocks. We found that associations were weakest for the first generation of epigenetic clocks developed to predict age differences between people. Associations were stronger for the second generation of epigenetic clocks developed to predict mortality and health risks. The strongest associations were observed for a third generation of epigenetic clocks, sometimes referred to as "epigenetic speedometers", developed to predict the pace of aging. In studies of children, only the speedometers showed significant associations with SES. Effects of sex and technical factors were minimal and there was no evidence of publication bias.
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 | 0.017 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".