↓ Skip to main content

Confounding and Statistical Significance of Indirect Effects: Childhood Adversity, Education, Smoking, and Anxious and Depressive Symptomatology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Confounding and Statistical Significance of Indirect Effects: Childhood Adversity, Education, Smoking, and Anxious and Depressive Symptomatology
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01317
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mashhood Ahmed Sheikh

Abstract

The life course perspective, the risky families model, and stress-and-coping models provide the rationale for assessing the role of smoking as a mediator in the association between childhood adversity and anxious and depressive symptomatology (ADS) in adulthood. However, no previous study has assessed the independent mediating role of smoking in the association between childhood adversity and ADS in adulthood. Moreover, the importance of mediator-response confounding variables has rarely been demonstrated empirically in social and psychiatric epidemiology. The aim of this paper was to (i) assess the mediating role of smoking in adulthood in the association between childhood adversity and ADS in adulthood, and (ii) assess the change in estimates due to different mediator-response confounding factors (education, alcohol intake, and social support). The present analysis used data collected from 1994 to 2008 within the framework of the Tromsø Study (N = 4,530), a representative prospective cohort study of men and women. Seven childhood adversities (low mother's education, low father's education, low financial conditions, exposure to passive smoke, psychological abuse, physical abuse, and substance abuse distress) were used to create a childhood adversity score. Smoking status was measured at a mean age of 54.7 years (Tromsø IV), and ADS in adulthood was measured at a mean age of 61.7 years (Tromsø V). Mediation analysis was used to assess the indirect effect and the proportion of mediated effect (%) of childhood adversity on ADS in adulthood via smoking in adulthood. The test-retest reliability of smoking was good (Kappa: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.63; 0.71) in this sample. Childhood adversity was associated with a 10% increased risk of smoking in adulthood (Relative risk: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03; 1.18), and both childhood adversity and smoking in adulthood were associated with greater levels of ADS in adulthood (p < 0.001). Smoking in adulthood did not significantly mediate the association between childhood adversity and ADS in adulthood. However, when education was excluded as a mediator-response confounding variable, the indirect effect of childhood adversity on ADS in adulthood was statistically significant (p < 0.05). This study shows that a careful inclusion of potential confounding variables is important when assessing mediation.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 31 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Social Sciences 10 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 37 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2017.
All research outputs
#12,990,585
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,848
of 30,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,218
of 317,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#314
of 584 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 584 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.