Cargando…

Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank

BACKGROUND: We assessed whether body mass index (BMI) affects social and socio-economic outcomes. METHODS: We used Mendelian randomization (MR), non-linear MR and non-genetic and MR within-sibling analyses, to estimate relationships of BMI with six socio-economic and four social outcomes in 378 244...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Howe, Laura D, Kanayalal, Roshni, Harrison, Sean, Beaumont, Robin N, Davies, Alisha R, Frayling, Timothy M, Davies, Neil M, Hughes, Amanda, Jones, Samuel E, Sassi, Franco, Wood, Andrew R, Tyrrell, Jessica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7750981/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31800047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyz240
_version_ 1783625582960967680
author Howe, Laura D
Kanayalal, Roshni
Harrison, Sean
Beaumont, Robin N
Davies, Alisha R
Frayling, Timothy M
Davies, Neil M
Hughes, Amanda
Jones, Samuel E
Sassi, Franco
Wood, Andrew R
Tyrrell, Jessica
author_facet Howe, Laura D
Kanayalal, Roshni
Harrison, Sean
Beaumont, Robin N
Davies, Alisha R
Frayling, Timothy M
Davies, Neil M
Hughes, Amanda
Jones, Samuel E
Sassi, Franco
Wood, Andrew R
Tyrrell, Jessica
author_sort Howe, Laura D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We assessed whether body mass index (BMI) affects social and socio-economic outcomes. METHODS: We used Mendelian randomization (MR), non-linear MR and non-genetic and MR within-sibling analyses, to estimate relationships of BMI with six socio-economic and four social outcomes in 378 244 people of European ancestry in UK Biobank. RESULTS: In MR of minimally related individuals, higher BMI was related to higher deprivation, lower income, fewer years of education, lower odds of degree-level education and skilled employment. Non-linear MR suggested both low (bottom decile, <22 kg/m(2)) and high (top seven deciles, >24.6 kg/m(2)) BMI, increased deprivation and reduced income. Non-genetic within-sibling analysis supported an effect of BMI on socio-economic position (SEP); precision in within-sibling MR was too low to draw inference about effects of BMI on SEP. There was some evidence of pleiotropy, with MR Egger suggesting limited effects of BMI on deprivation, although precision of these estimates is also low. Non-linear MR suggested that low BMI (bottom three deciles, <23.5 kg/m(2)) reduces the odds of cohabiting with a partner or spouse in men, whereas high BMI (top two deciles, >30.7 kg/m(2)) reduces the odds of cohabitation in women. Both non-genetic and MR within-sibling analyses supported this sex-specific effect of BMI on cohabitation. In men only, higher BMI was related to lower participation in leisure and social activities. There was little evidence that BMI affects visits from friends and family or having someone to confide in. CONCLUSIONS: BMI may affect social and socio-economic outcomes, with both high and low BMI being detrimental for SEP, although larger within-family MR studies may help to test the robustness of MR results in unrelated individuals. Triangulation of evidence across MR and within-family analyses supports evidence of a sex-specific effect of BMI on cohabitation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7750981
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77509812020-12-28 Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank Howe, Laura D Kanayalal, Roshni Harrison, Sean Beaumont, Robin N Davies, Alisha R Frayling, Timothy M Davies, Neil M Hughes, Amanda Jones, Samuel E Sassi, Franco Wood, Andrew R Tyrrell, Jessica Int J Epidemiol Mendelian Randomization BACKGROUND: We assessed whether body mass index (BMI) affects social and socio-economic outcomes. METHODS: We used Mendelian randomization (MR), non-linear MR and non-genetic and MR within-sibling analyses, to estimate relationships of BMI with six socio-economic and four social outcomes in 378 244 people of European ancestry in UK Biobank. RESULTS: In MR of minimally related individuals, higher BMI was related to higher deprivation, lower income, fewer years of education, lower odds of degree-level education and skilled employment. Non-linear MR suggested both low (bottom decile, <22 kg/m(2)) and high (top seven deciles, >24.6 kg/m(2)) BMI, increased deprivation and reduced income. Non-genetic within-sibling analysis supported an effect of BMI on socio-economic position (SEP); precision in within-sibling MR was too low to draw inference about effects of BMI on SEP. There was some evidence of pleiotropy, with MR Egger suggesting limited effects of BMI on deprivation, although precision of these estimates is also low. Non-linear MR suggested that low BMI (bottom three deciles, <23.5 kg/m(2)) reduces the odds of cohabiting with a partner or spouse in men, whereas high BMI (top two deciles, >30.7 kg/m(2)) reduces the odds of cohabitation in women. Both non-genetic and MR within-sibling analyses supported this sex-specific effect of BMI on cohabitation. In men only, higher BMI was related to lower participation in leisure and social activities. There was little evidence that BMI affects visits from friends and family or having someone to confide in. CONCLUSIONS: BMI may affect social and socio-economic outcomes, with both high and low BMI being detrimental for SEP, although larger within-family MR studies may help to test the robustness of MR results in unrelated individuals. Triangulation of evidence across MR and within-family analyses supports evidence of a sex-specific effect of BMI on cohabitation. Oxford University Press 2019-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7750981/ /pubmed/31800047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyz240 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Mendelian Randomization
Howe, Laura D
Kanayalal, Roshni
Harrison, Sean
Beaumont, Robin N
Davies, Alisha R
Frayling, Timothy M
Davies, Neil M
Hughes, Amanda
Jones, Samuel E
Sassi, Franco
Wood, Andrew R
Tyrrell, Jessica
Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title_full Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title_fullStr Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title_full_unstemmed Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title_short Effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: Mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in UK Biobank
title_sort effects of body mass index on relationship status, social contact and socio-economic position: mendelian randomization and within-sibling study in uk biobank
topic Mendelian Randomization
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7750981/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31800047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyz240
work_keys_str_mv AT howelaurad effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT kanayalalroshni effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT harrisonsean effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT beaumontrobinn effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT daviesalishar effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT fraylingtimothym effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT daviesneilm effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT hughesamanda effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT jonessamuele effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT sassifranco effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT woodandrewr effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank
AT tyrrelljessica effectsofbodymassindexonrelationshipstatussocialcontactandsocioeconomicpositionmendelianrandomizationandwithinsiblingstudyinukbiobank