Towards a greater global understanding of wellbeing: A proposal for a more inclusive measure

The science of wellbeing has come a long way from the early days of measuring wellbeing via a nation’s GDP, and wellbeing measures and concepts continue to proliferate to capture its various elements. Yet, much of this activity has reflected concepts from Western cultures, despite the emphasis placed on wellbeing in all corners of the globe. To meet the challenges and opportunities arising from cross-disciplinary research worldwide, the Well-Being for Planet Earth Foundation and the Gallup World Poll have joined forces to add more culturally relevant constructs and questions to existing Gallup modules. In this white paper, we review the discussion from the international well-being summit in Kyoto, Japan (August 2019), where nine such additions were proposed and highlight why a more global view of wellbeing is needed. Overall, the new items reflect a richer view of wellbeing than life satisfaction alone and include hedonic and eudaimonic facets of wellbeing, social wellbeing, the role of culture, community, nature, and governance. These additions allow for the measurement of a broader conceptualization of wellbeing, more refined and nuanced cross-cultural comparisons, and facilitate a better examination of the causes of variation in global wellbeing. The new Gallup World Poll additions will be trialled in 2020, with additional inclusions from this summit to be made in 2021

Multivariate genome-wide analyses of the well-being spectrum

We introduce two novel methods for multivariate genome-wide-association meta-analysis (GWAMA) of related traits that correct for sample overlap. A broad range of simulation scenarios supports the added value of our multivariate methods relative to univariate GWAMA. We applied the novel methods to life satisfaction, positive affect, neuroticism, and depressive symptoms, collectively referred to as the well-being spectrum (Nobs = 2,370,390), and found 304 significant independent signals. Our multivariate approaches resulted in a 26% increase in the number of independent signals relative to the four univariate GWAMAs and in an ~57% increase in the predictive power of polygenic risk scores. Supporting transcriptome- and methylome-wide analyses (TWAS and MWAS, respectively) uncovered an additional 17 and 75 independent loci, respectively. Bioinformatic analyses, based on gene expression in brain tissues and cells, showed that genes differentially expressed in the subiculum and GABAergic interneurons are enriched in their effect on the well-being spectrum

The human physiology of well-being: A systematic review on the association between neurotransmitters, hormones, inflammatory markers, the microbiome and well-being

To understand the pathways through which well-being contributes to health, we performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines on the association between well-being and physiological markers in four categories, neurotransmitters, hormones, inflammatory markers, and microbiome. We identified 91 studies. Neurotransmitter studies (knumber of studies=9) reported only a possible positive association between serotonin and well-being. For the hormone studies (k = 48), a lower momentary cortisol level was related to higher well-being (meta-analytic r = −0.06), and a steeper diurnal slope of cortisol levels. Inflammatory marker studies (k = 36) reported negative or non-significant relations with well-being, with meta-analytic estimates of respectively r = −0.07 and r = −0.05 for C-reactive protein and interleukin-6. Microbiome studies (k = 4) reported inconsistent associations between different bacteria abundance and well-being. The results indicate possible but small roles of serotonin, cortisol, and inflammatory markers in explaining differences in well-being. The inconsistent and limited results for other markers and microbiome require further research. Future directions for a complete picture of the physiological factors underlying well-being are proposed

Genetic factors explain a significant part of associations between adolescent well-being and the social environment

Socio-environmental factors play an important role in adolescent well-being, but potential genetic contributions to these associations are rarely assessed. To address this gap in the literature, associations between well-being and family conflict and functioning, number of friends, friendship importance and satisfaction, and leisure time variables were studied in N =  ~ 4700 twin pairs from the Netherlands Twin Register, us ing generalized estimating equations and twin-difference scores. When twin-difference scores indicated a role for genetic factors, we used bivariate genetic models to quantify genetic and environmental contributions to these associations. We identify significant associations between well-being and family functioning, family conflict, different leisure time activities, number of friends, and satisfaction with friendships. Additionally, we find evidence for large (73–91%) genetic influence on the associations between well-being and family conflict and functioning, leisure time sport/scouting clubs, and satisfaction with friendships. Finally, findings support the hypothesis of a causal association between well-being and family conflict and functioning. These findings have important implications for research into the social correlates of well-being in adolescence, as not taking genetic factors into account leads to overestimations of the influence of identified correlates and consequently to recommendations of these correlates as intervention targets. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00787-021-01798-3

The potential role of gray matter volume differences in the association between smoking and depression:A narrative review

Tobacco use and major depression are both leading contributors to the global burden of disease and are also highly comorbid. Previous research indicates bi-directional causality between tobacco use and depression, but the mechanisms that underlie this causality are unclear, especially for the causality from tobacco use to depression. Here we narratively review the available evidence for a potential causal role of gray matter volume in the association. We summarize the findings of large existing neuroimaging meta-analyses, studies in UK Biobank, and the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through MetaAnalysis (ENIGMA) consortium and assess the overlap in implicated brain areas. In addition, we review two types of methods that allow us more insight into the causal nature of associations between brain volume and depression/smoking: longitudinal studies and Mendelian Randomization studies. While the available evidence suggests overlap in the alterations in brain volumes implicated in tobacco use and depression, there is a lack of research examining the underlying pathophysiology. We conclude with recommendations on (genetically-informed) causal inference methods useful for studying these associations.</p

Expanding the environmental scope: an environment-wide association study for mental well-being

BACKGROUND: Identifying modifiable factors associated with well-being is of increased interest for public policy guidance. Developments in record linkage make it possible to identify what contributes to well-being from a myriad of factors. To this end, we link two large-scale data resources; the Geoscience and Health Cohort Consortium, a collection of geo-data, and the Netherlands Twin Register, which holds population-based well-being data. OBJECTIVE: We perform an Environment-Wide Association Study (EnWAS), where we examine 139 neighbourhood-level environmental exposures in relation to well-being. METHODS: First, we performed a generalized estimation equation regression (N = 11,975) to test for the effects of environmental exposures on well-being. Second, to account for multicollinearity amongst exposures, we performed principal component regression. Finally, using a genetically informative design, we examined whether environmental exposure is driven by genetic predisposition for well-being. RESULTS: We identified 21 environmental factors that were associated with well-being in the domains: housing stock, income, core neighbourhood characteristics, livability, and socioeconomic status. Of these associations, socioeconomic status and safety are indicated as the most important factors to explain differences in well-being. No evidence of gene-environment correlation was found. SIGNIFICANCE: These observed associations, especially neighbourhood safety, could be informative for policy makers and provide public policy guidance to improve well-being. Our results show that linking databases is a fruitful exercise to identify determinants of mental health that would remain unknown by a more unilateral approach

Self-rated health when population health is challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic; a longitudinal study

Rationale: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and consequent lockdown measures have had a large impact on people's lives. Recent evidence suggests that self-rated health (SRH) scores remained relatively stable or increased during the pandemic. Objective: For the current project, we examine potential changes in the variance decomposition of SRH before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. Methods: We analyse data from the Netherlands Twin Register to examine pre-pandemic SRH scores (N = 16,127), pandemic SRH scores (N = 17,451), and SRH difference scores (N = 7464). Additionally, we perform bivariate genetic analyses to estimate genetic and environmental variance components in pre-pandemic and pandemic SRH, and estimate the genetic correlation to assess potential gene-environment interaction. Results: The majority of the sample (66.7%) reported the same SRH before and during the pandemic, while 10.8% reported a decrease, and 22.5% an increase. Individuals who reported good/excellent SRH before the pandemic were most likely to report unchanged SRH during the pandemic, and individuals with bad/mediocre/reasonable SRH more often reported increased SRH. The bivariate longitudinal genetic model reveals no significant change in variance decomposition of SRH from before to during the pandemic, with a heritability estimate of 45% (CI 36%–52%). We found that the genetic correlation could be constrained to 1, and a moderate unique environmental correlation (rE = 0.49, CI = 0.37 to 0.60). Conclusions: We theorize that the increases in SRH are explained by uninfected individuals evaluating their health more positively than under normal circumstances (partly through social comparison with infected individuals), rather than actual improvements. As the same genes are expressed under different environmental exposures, these results imply no evidence for gene-environment interaction. While different environmental factors might influence SRH at the two time-points, the influence of environmental factors does not become relatively more important during the pandemic

A Comparison of the ASEBA Adult Self Report (ASR) and the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM/18-59)

The adult self report (ASR) is a well-validated instrument with multiple scales relating to adult psychopathology. Recently, an 18-item version has been introduced, the brief problem monitor (BPM) to measure Internalizing behavior (INT), Externalizing behavior (EXT), and attention problems (ATT). The present study compared the BPM and ASR and investigated how well the BPM can serve as a supplement or an alternative for the ASR for specific clinical and scientific purposes. In a large sample of adult twins (N = 9.835) from the Netherlands Twin Register (NTR), we compared the internal consistency, clinical classification concordance, means, and variances of the ASR and BPM. Using the classical twin design, we investigated the genetic covariance structure. For external validation, the associations between subjective well-being and different subscales of the ASR and BPM were compared. The internal consistency of the BPM scales (around α = 0.75) was somewhat lower than the ASR (α ~ 0.85). The BPM Externalizing scale showed the lowest internal consistency (α = 0.63). ASR and BPM scores showed good clinical classification concordance (0.61-0.80) and high correlations (r > 0.88). A small reversed sex difference in the BPM Externalizing scale appeared (women > men). Genetic (0.34-0.54) and environmental components (0.46-0.66) explained the variance to a similar extent for the ASR and BPM. The phenotypic and genetic associations with well-being were comparable. In situations where sum scores are sufficient, the BPM performs as well as the longer ASR. Depending on the situation and goal, it is worth considering the BPM as an alternative for the ASR to reduce the participant burden