Clementine Semanaz, Akhgar Ghassabian, Scott Delaney, Fang Fang, David R Williams, Henning Tiemeier
{"title":"Considerations When Accounting for Race and Ethnicity in Studies of Poverty and Neurodevelopment.","authors":"Clementine Semanaz, Akhgar Ghassabian, Scott Delaney, Fang Fang, David R Williams, Henning Tiemeier","doi":"10.1016/j.jaac.2025.03.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Poverty and systemic racism are intertwined. Children of marginalized racial and ethnic identities experience higher levels of poverty and adverse psychiatric outcomes. Thus, in models of poverty and neurodevelopment, race and ethnicity, as proxies for exposure to systemic disadvantage, are regularly considered confounders. Recently, however, some researchers have claimed that using race and ethnicity as confounders is statistically dubious, and potentially socially damaging. Instead, they argue for the use of variables measuring other social determinants of health (SDoH). We explore this approach herein.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data are from 7,836 children 10 years of age in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (ABCD Study). We fit mixed regression models for the association of household poverty measures with psychiatric symptoms, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived cortical measures, and cognition with and without (1) race and ethnicity adjustment, (2) poverty-by-race and ethnicity interaction terms, and (3) alternative SDoH variables. Propensity-based weights were used to calibrate the sample to key US demographics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For psychiatric and cognitive outcomes, poverty-outcome relationships differed across racial and ethnic groups (interaction of poverty by race and ethnicity, p < .05). For MRI-derived outcomes, adjusting for race and ethnicity changed the estimate of the impact of poverty. Alternative SDoH adjustment could not fully account for the impact of race and ethnicity on the associations explored.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Poverty and both race and ethnicity combine to influence neurodevelopment. Results suggest that the effects of poverty are generally inconsistent across race and ethnicity, which supports prior research demonstrating the nonequivalence of SDoH indicators by race and ethnicity. Studies exploring these relationships should assess the interaction between poverty and race and ethnicity and/or should stratify when appropriate. Replacing race and ethnicity with alternative SDoH may induce bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":17186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2025.03.007","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Poverty and systemic racism are intertwined. Children of marginalized racial and ethnic identities experience higher levels of poverty and adverse psychiatric outcomes. Thus, in models of poverty and neurodevelopment, race and ethnicity, as proxies for exposure to systemic disadvantage, are regularly considered confounders. Recently, however, some researchers have claimed that using race and ethnicity as confounders is statistically dubious, and potentially socially damaging. Instead, they argue for the use of variables measuring other social determinants of health (SDoH). We explore this approach herein.
Method: Data are from 7,836 children 10 years of age in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (ABCD Study). We fit mixed regression models for the association of household poverty measures with psychiatric symptoms, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived cortical measures, and cognition with and without (1) race and ethnicity adjustment, (2) poverty-by-race and ethnicity interaction terms, and (3) alternative SDoH variables. Propensity-based weights were used to calibrate the sample to key US demographics.
Results: For psychiatric and cognitive outcomes, poverty-outcome relationships differed across racial and ethnic groups (interaction of poverty by race and ethnicity, p < .05). For MRI-derived outcomes, adjusting for race and ethnicity changed the estimate of the impact of poverty. Alternative SDoH adjustment could not fully account for the impact of race and ethnicity on the associations explored.
Conclusion: Poverty and both race and ethnicity combine to influence neurodevelopment. Results suggest that the effects of poverty are generally inconsistent across race and ethnicity, which supports prior research demonstrating the nonequivalence of SDoH indicators by race and ethnicity. Studies exploring these relationships should assess the interaction between poverty and race and ethnicity and/or should stratify when appropriate. Replacing race and ethnicity with alternative SDoH may induce bias.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (JAACAP) is dedicated to advancing the field of child and adolescent psychiatry through the publication of original research and papers of theoretical, scientific, and clinical significance. Our primary focus is on the mental health of children, adolescents, and families.
We welcome unpublished manuscripts that explore various perspectives, ranging from genetic, epidemiological, neurobiological, and psychopathological research, to cognitive, behavioral, psychodynamic, and other psychotherapeutic investigations. We also encourage submissions that delve into parent-child, interpersonal, and family research, as well as clinical and empirical studies conducted in inpatient, outpatient, consultation-liaison, and school-based settings.
In addition to publishing research, we aim to promote the well-being of children and families by featuring scholarly papers on topics such as health policy, legislation, advocacy, culture, society, and service provision in relation to mental health.
At JAACAP, we strive to foster collaboration and dialogue among researchers, clinicians, and policy-makers in order to enhance our understanding and approach to child and adolescent mental health.