Toni Myllyaho1, Virva Siira2, Karl-Erik Wahlberg3, Helinä Hakko4, Ville Tikkanen3, Kristian Läksy5, Riikka Roisko4, Mika Niemelä4,6, Sami Räsänen4,7. 1. University of Oulu, Unit of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychiatry, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5000, 90014, Oulu, Finland. toni.myllyaho@student.oulu.fi. 2. Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 2000, 90014, Oulu, Finland. 3. University of Oulu, Unit of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychiatry, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5000, 90014, Oulu, Finland. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Oulu University Hospital, P.O. Box 26, 90014, Oulu, Finland. 5. Social Security Institute of Finland (SSI), Helsinki, Finland. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Center for Life Course Health Research, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5000, 90014, Oulu, Finland. 7. Faculty of Medicine, Research Unit of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychiatry, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5000, 90014, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Earlier findings indicate that socioeconomic status (SES) of family associates with family functioning. This study examined the impacts of family functioning and genetic risk for schizophrenia on psychiatric morbidity of adoptees in families of high SES (HSES) and low SES (LSES). METHODS: The study population is a subgroup of the Finnish Adoptive Family Study of Schizophrenia. Of the adoptees, 152 had high genetic risk for schizophrenia spectrum disorders (HR) and 151 adoptees had low risk (LR). Of the adoptees, 185 (HR = 94, LR = 91) were raised in high-SES (HSES) families and 118 (HR = 58, LR = 60) in low-SES (LSES) families. The family SES was determined by the occupational status of the main provider of the family. The functioning of adoptive families was assessed based on Global Family Ratings (GFRs) and psychiatric disorders on DSM-III-R criteria. RESULTS: In the HSES families, the psychiatric morbidity of the adoptees was emphasized by HR (OR = 4.28, CI 2.14-8.56) and dysfunctional family processes (OR = 6.44, CI 2.75-15.04). In the LSES families, the adoptees´ psychiatric morbidity was almost significantly increased by HR (OR = 2.10, CI 0.99-4.45), but not by dysfunctional family processes (OR = 1.33, CI 0.53-3.34). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that in HSES families, dysfunctional family processes and HR for schizophrenia increased the likelihoods for the development of psychiatric disorders in adoptees. The results can be utilized in identifying risk factors in the development of psychiatric disorders and focusing preventative strategies on risk groups with acknowledging the importance of family functioning.
PURPOSE: Earlier findings indicate that socioeconomic status (SES) of family associates with family functioning. This study examined the impacts of family functioning and genetic risk for schizophrenia on psychiatric morbidity of adoptees in families of high SES (HSES) and low SES (LSES). METHODS: The study population is a subgroup of the Finnish Adoptive Family Study of Schizophrenia. Of the adoptees, 152 had high genetic risk for schizophrenia spectrum disorders (HR) and 151 adoptees had low risk (LR). Of the adoptees, 185 (HR = 94, LR = 91) were raised in high-SES (HSES) families and 118 (HR = 58, LR = 60) in low-SES (LSES) families. The family SES was determined by the occupational status of the main provider of the family. The functioning of adoptive families was assessed based on Global Family Ratings (GFRs) and psychiatric disorders on DSM-III-R criteria. RESULTS: In the HSES families, the psychiatric morbidity of the adoptees was emphasized by HR (OR = 4.28, CI 2.14-8.56) and dysfunctional family processes (OR = 6.44, CI 2.75-15.04). In the LSES families, the adoptees´ psychiatric morbidity was almost significantly increased by HR (OR = 2.10, CI 0.99-4.45), but not by dysfunctional family processes (OR = 1.33, CI 0.53-3.34). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that in HSES families, dysfunctional family processes and HR for schizophrenia increased the likelihoods for the development of psychiatric disorders in adoptees. The results can be utilized in identifying risk factors in the development of psychiatric disorders and focusing preventative strategies on risk groups with acknowledging the importance of family functioning.
Authors: Paula A Braveman; Catherine Cubbin; Susan Egerter; Sekai Chideya; Kristen S Marchi; Marilyn Metzler; Samuel Posner Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-12-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mika Kivimäki; G David Batty; Jaana Pentti; Martin J Shipley; Pyry N Sipilä; Solja T Nyberg; Sakari B Suominen; Tuula Oksanen; Sari Stenholm; Marianna Virtanen; Michael G Marmot; Archana Singh-Manoux; Eric J Brunner; Joni V Lindbohm; Jane E Ferrie; Jussi Vahtera Journal: Lancet Public Health Date: 2020-01-31
Authors: M Van den Hof; A M Ter Haar; H J Scherpbier; P Reiss; F W N M Wit; K J Oostrom; D Pajkrt Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 3.240