Elizabeth C Long1, Sara L Lönn2, Jianguang Ji2, Paul Lichtenstein3, Jan Sundquist2, Kristina Sundquist2, Kenneth S Kendler1,4,5. 1. Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Richmond, Virginia. 2. Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden. 3. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 5. Department of Human and Molecular Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resilience has been shown to be protective against alcohol use disorders (AUDs), but the magnitude and nature of the relationship between these 2 phenotypes are not clear. The aim of this study was to examine the strength of this relationship and the degree to which it results from common genetic or common environmental influences. METHODS: Resilience was assessed on a 9-point scale during a personal interview in 1,653,721 Swedish men aged 17 to 25 years. AUD was identified based on Swedish medical, legal, and pharmacy registries. The magnitude of the relationship between resilience and AUD was examined using logistic regression. The extent to which the relationship arises from common genetic or common environmental factors was examined using a bivariate Cholesky decomposition model. RESULTS: The 5 single items that comprised the resilience assessment (social maturity, interest, psychological energy, home environment, and emotional control) all reduced risk for subsequent AUD, with social maturity showing the strongest effect. The linear effect by logistic regression showed that a 1-point increase on the resilience scale was associated with a 29% decrease in odds of AUD. The Cholesky decomposition model demonstrated that the resilience-AUD relationship was largely attributable to overlapping genetic and shared environmental factors (57 and 36%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Resilience is strongly associated with a reduction in risk for AUD. This relationship appears to be the result of overlapping genetic and shared environmental influences that impact resilience and risk of AUD, rather than a directly causal relationship.
BACKGROUND: Resilience has been shown to be protective against alcohol use disorders (AUDs), but the magnitude and nature of the relationship between these 2 phenotypes are not clear. The aim of this study was to examine the strength of this relationship and the degree to which it results from common genetic or common environmental influences. METHODS: Resilience was assessed on a 9-point scale during a personal interview in 1,653,721 Swedish men aged 17 to 25 years. AUD was identified based on Swedish medical, legal, and pharmacy registries. The magnitude of the relationship between resilience and AUD was examined using logistic regression. The extent to which the relationship arises from common genetic or common environmental factors was examined using a bivariate Cholesky decomposition model. RESULTS: The 5 single items that comprised the resilience assessment (social maturity, interest, psychological energy, home environment, and emotional control) all reduced risk for subsequent AUD, with social maturity showing the strongest effect. The linear effect by logistic regression showed that a 1-point increase on the resilience scale was associated with a 29% decrease in odds of AUD. The Cholesky decomposition model demonstrated that the resilience-AUD relationship was largely attributable to overlapping genetic and shared environmental factors (57 and 36%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Resilience is strongly associated with a reduction in risk for AUD. This relationship appears to be the result of overlapping genetic and shared environmental influences that impact resilience and risk of AUD, rather than a directly causal relationship.
Authors: Steven Boker; Michael Neale; Hermine Maes; Michael Wilde; Michael Spiegel; Timothy Brick; Jeffrey Spies; Ryne Estabrook; Sarah Kenny; Timothy Bates; Paras Mehta; John Fox Journal: Psychometrika Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Lianne P de Vries; Bart M L Baselmans; Jurjen J Luykx; Eveline L de Zeeuw; Camelia C Minică; Eco J C de Geus; Christiaan H Vinkers; Meike Bartels Journal: Neurobiol Stress Date: 2021-03-14
Authors: Gopi K Neppala; Isabel Terkuhle; Ariella Wagner; Lauren Lepow; Riaz B Shaik; Rachel Freed; David Kimhy; Robert H Pietrzak; Eva Velthorst; Adriana Feder; Iliyan Ivanov; Muhammad A Parvaz Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2022-02-04
Authors: Kilian Lommer; Timo Schurr; Beatrice Frajo-Apor; Barbara Plattner; Anna Chernova; Andreas Conca; Martin Fronthaler; Christian Haring; Bernhard Holzner; Christian Macina; Josef Marksteiner; Carl Miller; Silvia Pardeller; Verena Perwanger; Roger Pycha; Martin Schmidt; Barbara Sperner-Unterweger; Franziska Tutzer; Alex Hofer Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 5.435