Department of Psychiatry, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, IDF, Division of Mental Health, and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Israel
Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Maastricht University, The Netherlands, and Division of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Department of Psychiatry, Mount-Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA
Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
Department of Mental Health, Ministry of Health, Jerusalem, Israel
Department of Psychiatry, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel
Division of Mental Health, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel
Department of Psychiatry, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv, University, Ramat Aviv, Israel
Correspondence: Department of Psychiatry, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel 52621. Email: mweiser{at}netvision.net.il
|
|
|---|
Aims To test for synergism in risk of schizophrenia between population density and a combined exposure of poor premorbid social and cognitive functioning.
Method For 371 603 adolescent males examined by the Israeli Draft Board on social and cognitive functioning, data on population density of place of residence and later hospitalisation for schizophrenia were obtained from population-based registries.
Results There was an interaction between population density (five
levels) and poor premorbid social and cognitive functioning (interaction
2=4.6, P=0.032). The adjusted increase in cumulative
incidence associated with one unitchange in population density was 0.10% in
the vulnerable group (95% CI 0.019–0.18, P=0.015), nine times
larger than that in the non-vulnerable group (0.011%, 95% CI
0.0017–0.020, P=0.021).
Conclusions Risk of schizophrenia may increase when people with a genetic liability to the disorder, expressed as poor social and cognitive functioning, need to cope with city life.
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Assessment
At age 16–17 years all Israeli males undergo cognitive, behavioural
and psychiatric assessments by the draft board in order to determine their
eligibility and aptitude for military service. The cognitive assessment
includes Ravens Progressive Matrices – Revised, which consist of
a series of visual pattern matching and analogy problems. This test measures
non-verbal abstract reasoning and visual–spatial problem-solving
abilities, is highly correlated with general cognitive abilities
(Duncan et al, 2000),
is scored between 0 (lowest) to 30 (highest) and has a normal distribution.
After the cognitive assessments are performed, an interview assessing
personality and behavioural traits is administered by trained college-age
individuals who have completed a 4-month training course on administration of
the interview. The behavioural assessment includes a sub-scale assessing
social functioning; this assessment includes questions such as How many
good friends do you have?, Do you have a girlfriend? and
Do you generally prefer to be with or without a group of
companions?. Scale points are 1, very poor: complete withdrawal; 2,
poor: weak interpersonal contacts; 3, adequate: can form relationships with
individuals and in a group; 4, good: good interpersonal relationships; and 5,
exceptional: superior interpersonal relatedness. The test–retest
reliability of the behavioural assessment for inductees interviewed after
several days by different interviewers is above 0.8, and population-based
norms are available (Gal,
1986).
On the basis of the interview and a physicians examination, adolescents who might be suffering from behavioural disturbances or mental illness are referred for an in-depth assessment by a mental health professional, and if the adolescent warrants a psychiatric diagnosis, a board-certified psychiatrist will examine him. Criteria for referral for an in-depth mental health assessment are having the lowest score on the prediction sub-scale (which reflects the interviewers assessment of the adolescents ability to succeed in the military), a history of psychological or psychiatric treatment, current complaints, or manifestation of behavioural abnormalities during the assessment procedure. The mental health assessment is done using a semi-structured interview administered by a clinical social worker or psychologist, who enquires about personal and family history, previous psychological and psychiatric treatments, interpersonal relationships, self-esteem, self-injurious and antisocial acts, and functioning within the family and in school. If the clinician suspects that the adolescent has psychopathological symptoms, the adolescent is referred to a board-certified psychiatrist for evaluation and an ICD–9 diagnosis. For a more detailed description of the draft board assessment procedure, see Gal (1986) and Tubiana & Ben-Shachar (1982).
Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics
The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics divides the country into
geographical units, which are areas with 3000–4000
residents. The division is performed so that the population in each area is as
homogeneous as possible in terms of ethnic background, culture and income.
Information about population density (calculated as number of persons per
km2 of each geographical unit) was obtained, as was a measure of
socio-economic status, based on number of persons per room in the home, number
of computers per household, number of motor vehicles per household and per
capita income (Central Bureau of
Statistics, 1995)
Israeli Psychiatric Hospitalisation Case Registry
The Israeli Psychiatric Hospitalisation Case Registry is a complete listing
of all ICD–10 discharge diagnoses assigned by a board-certified
psychiatrist at the reporting facility. All psychiatric hospitals, day
hospitals and psychiatric units in general hospitals are required by law to
report all admissions and discharges to this registry. From the registry we
identified patients with a last discharge diagnosis of schizophrenia
(ICD–10 codes F20.0–F20.9).
Study population
The file containing data on population density by address of residence at
the time of draft board assessment was linked to the draft board file, which
contains results of the boards assessments for the entire national
population of adolescents. This file was in turn linked to the Israeli
National Psychiatric Hospitalisation Case Registry, using national
identification numbers (equivalent to the US social security number). Before
the merged file was returned to the investigators for analysis, the national
identification numbers were removed, leaving the merged file un-identified, in
order to preserve confidentiality. This procedure identified 376 623
Israeli-born male adolescents consecutively assessed by the draft board, with
a (mean 8.57, s.d.=4.06) follow-up period for psychiatric hospitalisation of
1–17 years. From this file, we excluded 2251 (0.6%) inductees who had
been diagnosed during the draft board assessment as having a psychotic
disorder or major affective disorder (as some of these adolescents had major
affective disorder with psychotic symptoms). In addition, in order to exclude
individuals who had existing psychotic illness, or who had possibly been in
the prodromal phase of their illness when assessed by the draft board, we
excluded 717 (0.2%) persons who had been hospitalised before or up to 1 year
after the draft board assessment. Because this analysis referred only to
people later hospitalised with schizophrenia, we also excluded 2300 (0.6%)
adolescents who were later hospitalised with discharge diagnoses other than
schizophrenia. Owing to overlap between the excluded groups, the file analysed
contained data on 371 603 male adolescents who were born in Israel, were found
not to have a psychotic disorder as assessed by the draft board procedure, and
had not been admitted to hospital for any psychiatric disorder before or
within 1 year after the draft board assessment.
Statistical analyses
Main effects
Population density was categorised (van Os et al,
2003,
2004) into five levels by
dividing the population into equal quintiles. Social functioning was divided
into three groups: very poor or poor; adequate; and good or excellent.
Cognitive functioning (reflected by the scores on the Ravens
Progressive Matrices – Revised test) was categorised into three groups
by dividing the population into equal thirds, reflecting high, intermediate
and low functioning. As previous studies have shown poor social functioning
and poor cognitive functioning to be independently associated with increased
risk of later schizophrenia (Davidson
et al, 1999), we defined adolescents with both poor
social and poor cognitive functioning as having high vulnerability, compared
with the rest of the population.
We first estimated the individual associations between population density and high vulnerability using Cox regression models, taking into account the amount of time of follow-up until hospitalisation, or the date that the military file was linked to the hospitalisation file. We examined the effect of being vulnerable and of population density on the risk of hospitalisation for schizophrenia, while controlling for the other factor and the potential confounding effect of socio-economic status.
Interaction effects
Biological synergism (co-participation of causes towards the same outcome)
between environmental risk and background vulnerability is thought to be
common in multifactorial disorders such as schizophrenia. The classic problem,
however, is how biological synergism can be inferred from statistical
manipulations with research data (statistical interaction), in particular with
regard to the choice of additive or multiplicative models. It has been shown
that the true degree of biological synergism can be better estimated from
– but is not the same as – the additive statistical interaction
(Darroch, 1997;
Murray, 2003). This new method
was recently applied to schizophrenia, showing synergy between traumatic head
injury and familial liability (Malaspina
et al, 2001) between cannabis and psychosis liability
(van Os et al, 2002)
and between urbanicity and proxy genetic risk factors (van Os et al,
2003,
2004;
Spauwen et al, 2006).
Conforming to these previous publications, we calculated the additive
interaction between social and cognitive vulnerability on the one hand, and
population density on the other, in models of schizophrenia. The statistical
method used was similar to that used in other recent publications on this
topic (van Os et al,
2003,
2004;
Spauwen et al, 2006)
in that effects were expressed on the additive scale (i.e. as a risk
difference rather than a risk ratio), using risk difference regression in
Stata, version 9.1. The risk difference regression procedure procedure in
Stata fits generalised linear models estimating risk differences
(Wacholder, 1986;
Hardin & Cleves, 1999).
The statistical significance of the interactions was assessed by Wald test
(Clayton & Hills, 1993).
After calculation of the interaction term, effect sizes of population density,
stratified by level of vulnerability, were calculated from the model using the
appropriate linear combinations with the Stata LINCOM command. All analyses
were controlled for age and socioeconomic status.
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] | Table 1 Population density, social functioning and cognitive functioning, and cumulative incidence of schizophrenia |
The effect of increasing population density was larger for vulnerable
compared with non-vulnerable individuals (interaction
2=4.6,
P=0.032). Stratified analyses revealed that the risk difference per
unit change in population density was 0.011% in the non-vulnerable group (95%
CI 0.0016–0.020, P=0.021), whereas in the vulnerable group it
was nearly ten times larger (risk difference per unit change in population
density 0.10%, 95% CI 0.019–0.18, P=0.015), indicating that the
effect of increasing population density on increasing risk of schizophrenia is
particularly relevant for adolescents with both poor social and poor cognitive
functioning (Table 2).
|
View this table: [in a new window] | Table 2 Comparison of the effect of population density in people with low and high vulnerability for schizophrenia |
|
|
|---|
As the initial analysis of the effect of population density was controlled for social and cognitive functioning, the results presented here indicate there is still an independent effect of increasing population density on risk of schizophrenia. This finding is unique, as, to the best of our knowledge, none of the previous studies on the effect of population density of risk for schizophrenia controlled for social functioning.
As the analyses controlled for socioeconomic status, this report also confirms previous findings that socio-economic position prior to disease onset is not the cause of the association between schizophrenia and urban dwelling (Harrison et al, 2003).
Limitations
A previous report on the same topic reported absence of interaction between
urbanicity and family history (Mortensen
et al, 1999). That report, however, was based on
calculation of the multiplicative interaction, and it is important to note
that absence of interaction between two covariates on the multiplicative
level, with the exception of some special cases, will result in presence of
interaction between these covariates on the additive level, and vice versa.
This distinction is important, as it has recently been shown that the degree
of biological synergism can be more readily deduced from the additive
interaction (Darroch, 1997).
Thus, had we calculated interaction under the multiplicative model using Cox
regression, we would not have found significant interaction
(
2=0.8, P=0.37), although also under the
multiplicative model the risk per unit increase in urbanicity would have been
more than 80% greater in the vulnerable group (HR=1.11, 95% CI
1.02–1.21, P=0.020) compared with the non-vulnerable group
(HR=1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.11, P=0.020), adding to the validity of
our findings.
Since young women do not undergo the systematic behavioural and psychiatric assessment by the draft board, our findings apply directly only to men. Other research, however, has shown that urbanicity increases the risk of psychosis in both men and women (Peen & Dekker, 2003; Sundquist et al, 2004; Krabbendam & van Os, 2005). Also, using population density as such does not allow one to differentiate completely between urban and rural areas, as there are neighbourhoods with relatively low population density in urban areas, and neighbourhoods with relatively high population density in rural areas. This, however, has advantages as well, since being an actual measure of the number of people per unit area, it permits the assessment of the influence of population density as such, without making assumptions regarding the definitions of rural and urban.
Another limitation is that our results were not adjusted for parental mental illness (data that were not available to us). However, when other authors adjusted for this potential confounder, the urbanisation effect remained (Pedersen & Mortensen, 2001b). Also, neither the military database nor the psychiatric hospitalisation registry includes data regarding loss to follow-up, i.e. death or emigration. However, as the period of follow-up was 8.6 years (s.d.=4.1), until approximate age 25–26 years, death should not be a major cause of loss to follow-up, as the rates of death in this age group are slightly less than 1/1000 per year (information from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics). We were not able to find data on emigration from Israel during the years relevant to this study.
Another potential limitation is that the case registry diagnoses are clinical rather than research diagnoses. However, these diagnoses were assigned by board-certified psychiatrists who had the benefit of observing the patient throughout one or more hospitalisations, and had been trained and re-trained in the use of the diagnostic criteria of the ICD–9 and ICD–10. Moreover, studies that have compared clinical diagnoses of schizophrenia assigned in state hospitals (Pulver et al, 1988) with research diagnoses have shown a high degree of concordance between them. In a study published by our group we found that, compared with research diagnoses established using a Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia – Lifetime interview, the registry diagnoses of schizophrenia had a sensitivity of 0.89 (Weiser et al, 2005). Even if diagnostic misclassification had been an issue, this would have served to increase random error, making it more difficult to find an association between population density and schizophrenia, rather than producing a spurious one.
Strengths
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to use a direct
measure of social functioning to assess its interaction with the association
between increasing population density and risk of schizophrenia, and is
similar to a previous study measuring the quantity of social interaction,
which reported similar results (Stefanis
et al, 2004). Also, while assessing the effect of
increasing population density on risk of later hospitalisation for
schizophrenia, we removed the data for adolescents diagnosed with a psychotic
disorder in the draft board assessment, and those hospitalised for psychotic
disorder before or within a year after the assessment. This ensured that these
data were not confounded by people with a (prodromal) psychotic disorder
moving from rural to urban areas. We also used multiple data-sets compiled
independently of the research hypotheses, and had a relatively long follow-up
period of a population-based sample.
|
|
|---|
Related articles in BJP:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. March, S. L. Hatch, C. Morgan, J. B. Kirkbride, M. Bresnahan, P. Fearon, and E. Susser Psychosis and Place Epidemiol. Rev., November 1, 2008; 30(1): 84 - 100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. van Os, B. P. Rutten, and R. Poulton Gene-Environment Interactions in Schizophrenia: Review of Epidemiological Findings and Future Directions Schizophr Bull, November 1, 2008; 34(6): 1066 - 1082. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Kirkbride, D. Barker, F. Cowden, R. Stamps, M. Yang, P. B. Jones, and J. W. Coid Psychoses, ethnicity and socio-economic status The British Journal of Psychiatry, July 1, 2008; 193(1): 18 - 24. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
Read all eLetters
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||