Amy L Non1, Clarence C Gravlee, Connie J Mulligan. 1. Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. amynon@hsph.harvard.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the relative roles of education and genetic ancestry in predicting blood pressure (BP) within African Americans and explored the association between education and BP across racial groups. METHODS: We used t tests and linear regressions to examine the associations of genetic ancestry, estimated from a genomewide set of autosomal markers, and education with BP variation among African Americans in the Family Blood Pressure Program. We also performed linear regressions in self-identified African Americans and Whites to explore the association of education with BP across racial groups. RESULTS: Education, but not genetic ancestry, significantly predicted BP variation in the African American subsample (b=-0.51 mm Hg per year additional education; P=.001). Although education was inversely associated with BP in the total population, within-group analyses showed that education remained a significant predictor of BP only among the African Americans. We found a significant interaction (b=3.20; P=.006) between education and self-identified race in predicting BP. CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities in BP may be better explained by differences in education than by genetic ancestry. Future studies of ancestry and disease should include measures of the social environment.
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the relative roles of education and genetic ancestry in predicting blood pressure (BP) within African Americans and explored the association between education and BP across racial groups. METHODS: We used t tests and linear regressions to examine the associations of genetic ancestry, estimated from a genomewide set of autosomal markers, and education with BP variation among African Americans in the Family Blood Pressure Program. We also performed linear regressions in self-identified African Americans and Whites to explore the association of education with BP across racial groups. RESULTS: Education, but not genetic ancestry, significantly predicted BP variation in the African American subsample (b=-0.51 mm Hg per year additional education; P=.001). Although education was inversely associated with BP in the total population, within-group analyses showed that education remained a significant predictor of BP only among the African Americans. We found a significant interaction (b=3.20; P=.006) between education and self-identified race in predicting BP. CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities in BP may be better explained by differences in education than by genetic ancestry. Future studies of ancestry and disease should include measures of the social environment.
Authors: Wendy Johnson; Kirsten Ohm Kyvik; Erik L Mortensen; Axel Skytthe; G David Batty; Ian J Deary Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2009-10-27 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Kathy S Albain; Joseph M Unger; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Bisan A Salhi; Jennifer W Tsai; Jeffrey Druck; Jacqueline Ward-Gaines; Melissa H White; Bernard L Lopez Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2019-12-19
Authors: Melinda C Aldrich; Steve Selvin; Margaret R Wrensch; Jennette D Sison; Helen M Hansen; Charles P Quesenberry; Michael F Seldin; Lisa F Barcellos; Patricia A Buffler; John K Wiencke Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 9.308