Conceptualising and Operationalising Resilience in Older Adults

Context: As a result of increases in life expectancy and decreases in fertility, the proportion of the population entering later life has increased dramatically in recent decades. When faced with age-related challenges, some older adults respond more positively to adversity than would be expected given the level of adversity that they have experienced, demonstrating ‘resilience’. Objectives: Having a clear conceptual framework for resilience is a prerequisite to operationalising resilience in a research context. Methods: Here we compare and contrast several approaches to the operationalisation of resilience: psychometric-driven and data-driven (variable-centred and individual-centred) methods. Results: Psychometric-driven methods involve the administration of established questionnaires aimed at quantifying resilience. Data-driven techniques use statistical procedures to examine and/or operationalise resilience and can be broadly categorised into variable-centred methods, i.e. interaction and residuals, and individual-centred methods, i.e. categorical and latent class. Conclusions: The specific question(s) driving the research and the nature of the variables a researcher intends to use in their adversity-outcome dyad will largely dictate which methods are more (or less) appropriate in that circumstance. A measured approach to the ways in which resilience is investigated is warranted in order to facilitate the most useful application of this burgeoning field of research

Patterns of discordance of physical functioning in older persons; different associations for apathy and depression? Results from the NESDO-study

Objectives Discordance between self-reported functional limitations and performance-based physical functioning may have a negative impact in functional independence in older adults. We longitudinally examined baseline apathy- and depressive symptomatology as associates of discordance. Method 469 participants from the multi-site cohort study NESDO were included. Self-reported functional limitations were assessed by two items derived from the WHO-Disability Assessment Schedule. Performance-based physical functioning included walking speed and handgrip-strength. Both measures were rescaled, with final sum-scores ranging from 0 to 6. Discordance-scores were computed by subtracting sum-scores on performance-based measures from self-reported functional limitations. Using latent growth curve analysis, we estimated individual trajectories of discordance at baseline, 2-and 6-years follow-up, consisting of the baseline discordance-score (intercept) and the yearly change of discordance-score (slope). We then estimated associations with apathy and depression indicators. Results At baseline, persons (mean age 70.48 years, 65% female, 73% depressed) on average overestimated their daily functioning compared to performance tests (b = 0.77, p < 0.001). The average discordance-scores yearly increased by 0.15 (p < 0.001). Only in models adjusted for several demographic and clinical characteristics, depression severity was negatively associated with discordance-scores at baseline (b=-0.01, p = 0.02), while apathy was not (b=-0.02, p = 0.21). No associations with change over time were found. Conclusion In older persons, not indifference and diminished goal-directed activity, but negative emotions appear to underlie underestimation of one's physical capacity. Further research is needed to determine (1) to what extent targeting discordance results in actual preservation of physical functioning and (2) whether older persons with apathy and/or depression need different approaches for this purpose

The impact of COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity on mental health:longitudinal study in Dutch populations with and without mental health disorders

BACKGROUND: Despite growing concerns about mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in people with pre-existing mental health disorders, research has shown that symptoms of depression and anxiety were generally quite stable, with modest changes in certain subgroups. However, individual differences in cumulative exposure to COVID-19 stressors have not been yet considered.AIMS: We aimed to quantify and investigate the impact of individual-level cumulative exposure to COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity on changes in depressive and anxiety symptoms and loneliness. In addition, we examined whether the impact differed among individuals with various levels of pre-pandemic chronicity of mental health disorders.METHOD: Between April 2020 and July 2021, 15 successive online questionnaires were distributed among three psychiatric case-control cohorts that started in the 2000s ( N = 1377). Outcomes included depressive and anxiety symptoms and loneliness. We developed a COVID-19 Adversity Index (CAI) summarising up to 15 repeated measures of COVID-19-pandemic-related exposures (e.g. exposure to COVID-19 infection, negative economic impact and quarantine). We used linear mixed linear models to estimate the effects of COVID-19-related adversity on mental health and its interaction with pre-pandemic chronicity of mental health disorders and CAI. RESULTS: Higher CAI scores were positively associated with higher increases in depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and loneliness. Associations were not statistically significantly different between groups with and without (chronic) pre-pandemic mental health disorders.CONCLUSIONS: Individual differences in cumulative exposure to COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity are important predictors of mental health, but we found no evidence for higher vulnerability among people with (chronic) pre-pandemic mental health disorders.</p

The mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with and without depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders:a longitudinal study of three Dutch case-control cohorts

Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in people with pre-existing mental health disorders is unclear. In three psychiatry case-control cohorts, we compared the perceived mental health impact and coping and changes in depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, and loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic between people with and without lifetime depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders. Methods: Between April 1 and May 13, 2020, online questionnaires were distributed among the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety, Netherlands Study of Depression in Older Persons, and Netherlands Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Association cohorts, including people with (n=1181) and without (n=336) depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders. The questionnaire contained questions on perceived mental health impact, fear of COVID-19, coping, and four validated scales assessing depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, and loneliness used in previous waves during 2006–16. Number and chronicity of disorders were based on diagnoses in previous waves. Linear regression and mixed models were done. Findings: The number and chronicity of disorders showed a positive graded dose–response relation, with greater perceived impact on mental health, fear, and poorer coping. Although people with depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders scored higher on all four symptom scales than did individuals without these mental health disorders, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, they did not report a greater increase in symptoms during the pandemic. In fact, people without depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders showed a greater increase in symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas individuals with the greatest burden on their mental health tended to show a slight symptom decrease. Interpretation: People with depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders are experiencing a detrimental impact on their mental health from the COVID-19 pandemic, which requires close monitoring in clinical practice. Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to have further increased symptom severity compared with their prepandemic levels. Funding: Dutch Research Council

Mental health and perceived impact during the first Covid-19 pandemic year:A longitudinal study in Dutch case-control cohorts of persons with and without depressive, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorders

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the longer-term impact of the Covid-19 pandemic beyond the first months of 2020, particularly for people with pre-existing mental health disorders. Studies including pre-pandemic data from large psychiatric cohorts are scarce. METHODS: Between April 2020 and February 2021, twelve successive online questionnaires were distributed among participants of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety, Netherlands Study of Depression in Older Persons, and Netherlands Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Association Study (N = 1714, response rate 62%). Outcomes were depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, loneliness, perceived mental health impact of the pandemic, fear of Covid-19, positive coping, and happiness. Using linear mixed models we compared trajectories between subgroups with different pre-pandemic chronicity of disorders and healthy controls. RESULTS: Depressive, anxiety and worry symptoms were stable since April–May 2020 whereas happiness slightly decreased. Furthermore, positive coping steadily decreased and loneliness increased - exceeding pre-Covid and April–May 2020 levels. Perceived mental health impact and fear of Covid-19 fluctuated in accordance with national Covid-19 mortality rate changes. Absolute levels of all outcomes were poorer with higher chronicity of disorders, yet trajectories did not differ among subgroups. LIMITATIONS: The most vulnerable psychiatric groups may have been underrepresented and results may not be generalizable to lower income countries. CONCLUSIONS: After a year, levels of depressive and worry symptoms remained higher than before the pandemic in healthy control groups, yet not in psychiatric groups. Nevertheless, persistent high symptoms in psychiatric groups and increasing loneliness in all groups are specific points of concern for mental health care professionals

Psychosocial factors and cancer incidence (PSY-CA):Protocol for individual participant data meta-analyses

OBJECTIVES: Psychosocial factors have been hypothesized to increase the risk of cancer. This study aims (1) to test whether psychosocial factors (depression, anxiety, recent loss events, subjective social support, relationship status, general distress, and neuroticism) are associated with the incidence of any cancer (any, breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, smoking-related, and alcohol-related); (2) to test the interaction between psychosocial factors and factors related to cancer risk (smoking, alcohol use, weight, physical activity, sedentary behavior, sleep, age, sex, education, hormone replacement therapy, and menopausal status) with regard to the incidence of cancer; and (3) to test the mediating role of health behaviors (smoking, alcohol use, weight, physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep) in the relationship between psychosocial factors and the incidence of cancer.METHODS: The psychosocial factors and cancer incidence (PSY-CA) consortium was established involving experts in the field of (psycho-)oncology, methodology, and epidemiology. Using data collected in 18 cohorts (N = 617,355), a preplanned two-stage individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis is proposed. Standardized analyses will be conducted on harmonized datasets for each cohort (stage 1), and meta-analyses will be performed on the risk estimates (stage 2).CONCLUSION: PSY-CA aims to elucidate the relationship between psychosocial factors and cancer risk by addressing several shortcomings of prior meta-analyses.</p

Common variants in Alzheimer’s disease and risk stratification by polygenic risk scores

Funder: Funder: Fundación bancaria ‘La Caixa’ Number: LCF/PR/PR16/51110003 Funder: Grifols SA Number: LCF/PR/PR16/51110003 Funder: European Union/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Number: 115975 Funder: JPco-fuND FP-829-029 Number: 733051061Genetic discoveries of Alzheimer's disease are the drivers of our understanding, and together with polygenetic risk stratification can contribute towards planning of feasible and efficient preventive and curative clinical trials. We first perform a large genetic association study by merging all available case-control datasets and by-proxy study results (discovery n = 409,435 and validation size n = 58,190). Here, we add six variants associated with Alzheimer's disease risk (near APP, CHRNE, PRKD3/NDUFAF7, PLCG2 and two exonic variants in the SHARPIN gene). Assessment of the polygenic risk score and stratifying by APOE reveal a 4 to 5.5 years difference in median age at onset of Alzheimer's disease patients in APOE ɛ4 carriers. Because of this study, the underlying mechanisms of APP can be studied to refine the amyloid cascade and the polygenic risk score provides a tool to select individuals at high risk of Alzheimer's disease

Depression, anxiety, and the risk of cancer: An individual participant data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety have long been hypothesized to be related to an increased cancer risk. Despite the great amount of research that has been conducted, findings are inconclusive. To provide a stronger basis for addressing the associations between depression, anxiety, and the incidence of various cancer types (overall, breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, alcohol-related, and smoking-related cancers), individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses were performed within the Psychosocial Factors and Cancer Incidence (PSY-CA) consortium. METHODS: The PSY-CA consortium includes data from 18 cohorts with measures of depression or anxiety (up to N = 319,613; cancer incidences, 25,803; person-years of follow-up, 3,254,714). Both symptoms and a diagnosis of depression and anxiety were examined as predictors of future cancer risk. Two-stage IPD meta-analyses were run, first by using Cox regression models in each cohort (stage 1), and then by aggregating the results in random-effects meta-analyses (stage 2). RESULTS: No associations were found between depression or anxiety and overall, breast, prostate, colorectal, and alcohol-related cancers. Depression and anxiety (symptoms and diagnoses) were associated with the incidence of lung cancer and smoking-related cancers (hazard ratios [HRs], 1.06-1.60). However, these associations were substantially attenuated when additionally adjusting for known risk factors including smoking, alcohol use, and body mass index (HRs, 1.04-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Depression and anxiety are not related to increased risk for most cancer outcomes, except for lung and smoking-related cancers. This study shows that key covariates are likely to explain the relationship between depression, anxiety, and lung and smoking-related cancers. PREREGISTRATION NUMBER: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=157677

Common variants in Alzheimer's disease and risk stratification by polygenic risk scores.

Funder: Funder: Fundación bancaria ‘La Caixa’ Number: LCF/PR/PR16/51110003 Funder: Grifols SA Number: LCF/PR/PR16/51110003 Funder: European Union/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Number: 115975 Funder: JPco-fuND FP-829-029 Number: 733051061Genetic discoveries of Alzheimer's disease are the drivers of our understanding, and together with polygenetic risk stratification can contribute towards planning of feasible and efficient preventive and curative clinical trials. We first perform a large genetic association study by merging all available case-control datasets and by-proxy study results (discovery n = 409,435 and validation size n = 58,190). Here, we add six variants associated with Alzheimer's disease risk (near APP, CHRNE, PRKD3/NDUFAF7, PLCG2 and two exonic variants in the SHARPIN gene). Assessment of the polygenic risk score and stratifying by APOE reveal a 4 to 5.5 years difference in median age at onset of Alzheimer's disease patients in APOE ɛ4 carriers. Because of this study, the underlying mechanisms of APP can be studied to refine the amyloid cascade and the polygenic risk score provides a tool to select individuals at high risk of Alzheimer's disease