» Articles » PMID: 39395816

Influence of Intergenerational Social Mobility on Brain Structure and Global Cognition: Findings from the Whitehall II Study Across 20 years

Overview
Journal Age Ageing
Specialty Geriatrics
Date 2024 Oct 12
PMID 39395816
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Whether changes in socioeconomic position (SEP) across generations, i.e. intergenerational social mobility, influence brain degeneration and cognition in later life is unclear.

Objective: To examine the association of social mobility, brain grey matter structure and global cognition.

Methods: We analysed T1 brain MRI data of 771 old adults (69.8 ± 5.2 years) from the Whitehall II MRI substudy, with MRI data collected between 2012 and 2016. Social mobility was defined by SEP changes from their fathers' generation to mid-life status. Brain structural outcomes include grey matter (GM) volume and cortical thickness (CT) covering whole brain. Global cognition was measured by the Mini Mental State Examination. We firstly conducted analysis of covariance to identify regional difference of GM volume and cortical thickness across stable high/low and upward/downward mobility groups, followed with diagonal reference models studying the relationship between mobility and brain cognitive outcomes, apart from SEP origin and destination. We additionally conducted linear mixed models to check mobility interaction over time, where global cognition was derived from three phases across 2002 to 2017.

Results: Social mobility related to 48 out of the 136 GM volume regions and 4 out of the 68 CT regions. Declined volume was particularly seen in response to downward mobility, whereas no independent association of mobility with global cognition was observed.

Conclusion: Despite no strong evidence supporting direct influence of mobility on global cognition in later life, imaging findings warranted a severe level of neurodegeneration due to downward mobility from their father's generation.

References
1.
Glymour M, Manly J . Lifecourse social conditions and racial and ethnic patterns of cognitive aging. Neuropsychol Rev. 2008; 18(3):223-54. DOI: 10.1007/s11065-008-9064-z. View

2.
Merz E, Tottenham N, Noble K . Socioeconomic Status, Amygdala Volume, and Internalizing Symptoms in Children and Adolescents. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2017; 47(2):312-323. PMC: 6116521. DOI: 10.1080/15374416.2017.1326122. View

3.
Gugushvili A, Mckee M, Murphy M, Azarova A, Irdam D, Doniec K . Intergenerational Mobility in Relative Educational Attainment and Health-Related Behaviours. Soc Indic Res. 2019; 141(1):413-441. PMC: 6694039. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-017-1834-7. View

4.
Ericsson M, Lundholm C, Fors S, Aslan A, Zavala C, Reynolds C . Childhood social class and cognitive aging in the Swedish Adoption/Twin Study of Aging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017; 114(27):7001-7006. PMC: 5502597. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1620603114. View

5.
Lawson G, Duda J, Avants B, Wu J, Farah M . Associations between children's socioeconomic status and prefrontal cortical thickness. Dev Sci. 2013; 16(5):641-52. PMC: 3775298. DOI: 10.1111/desc.12096. View