Associations between socioeconomic status and white matter microstructure in children: indirect effects via obesity and cognition

Zhaolong Adrian Li, Yuqi Cai, Rita L. Taylor, Sarah A. Eisenstein, Deanna M. Barch, Scott Marek, Tamara Hershey
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.09.23285150

Abstract

Importance Both neighborhood and household socioeconomic disadvantage relate to negative health outcomes and altered brain structure in children. It is unclear whether such findings extend to white matter development, and via what mechanisms socioeconomic status (SES) influences the brain.

Objective To test independent associations between neighborhood and household SES indicators and white matter microstructure in children, and examine whether body mass index and cognitive function (a proxy of environmental cognitive/sensory stimulation) may plausibly mediate these associations.

Design This cross-sectional study used baseline data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, an ongoing 10-year cohort study tracking child health.

Setting School-based recruitment at 21 U.S. sites.

Participants Children aged 9 to 11 years and their parents/caregivers completed baseline assessments between October 1st, 2016 and October 31st, 2018. Data analysis was conducted from July to December 2022.

Exposures Neighborhood disadvantage was derived from area deprivation indices at primary residence. Household SES indicators were total income and the highest parental education attainment.

Main Outcomes and Measures Thirty-one major white matter tracts were segmented from diffusion-weighted images. The Restriction Spectrum Imaging (RSI) model was implemented to measure restricted normalized directional (RND; reflecting oriented myelin organization) and isotropic (RNI; reflecting glial/neuronal cell bodies) diffusion in each tract. Obesity-related measures were body mass index (BMI), BMI z-scores, and waist circumference, and cognitive performance was assessed using the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery. Linear mixed-effects models tested the associations between SES indicators and scanner-harmonized RSI metrics. Structural equation models examined indirect effects of obesity and cognitive performance in the significant associations between SES and white mater microstructure summary principal components. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, pubertal development stage, intracranial volume, and head motion.

Results The analytical sample included 8842 children (4299 [48.6%] girls; mean age [SD], 9.9 [0.7] years). Greater neighborhood disadvantage and lower parental education were independently associated with lower RSI-RND in forceps major and corticospinal/pyramidal tracts, and had overlapping associations in the superior longitudinal fasciculus. Lower cognition scores and greater obesity-related measures partially accounted for these SES associations with RSI-RND. Lower household income was related to higher RSI-RNI in almost every tract, and greater neighborhood disadvantage had similar effects in primarily frontolimbic tracts. Lower parental education was uniquely linked to higher RSI-RNI in forceps major. Greater obesity-related measures partially accounted for these SES associations with RSI-RNI. Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses and mostly corroborated using traditional diffusion tensor imaging (DTI).

Conclusions and Relevance These cross-sectional results demonstrate that both neighborhood and household contexts are relevant to white matter development in children, and suggest cognitive performance and obesity as possible pathways of influence. Interventions targeting obesity reduction and improving cognition from multiple socioeconomic angles may ameliorate brain health in low-SES children.

Question Are neighborhood and household socioeconomic levels associated with children’s brain white matter microstructure, and if so, do obesity and cognitive performance (reflecting environmental stimulation) mediate the associations?

Findings In a cohort of 8842 children, higher neighborhood disadvantage, lower household income, and lower parental education had independent and overlapping associations with lower restricted directional diffusion and greater restricted isotropic diffusion in white matter. Greater body mass index and poorer cognitive performance partially mediated these associations.

Meaning Both neighborhood and household poverty may contribute to altered white matter development in children. These effects may be partially explained by obesity incidence and poorer cognitive performance.

1. Introduction

Socioeconomic disadvantage (e.g., poverty) during early life, as experienced by nearly 11.8 million U.S. children in 20211, relates robustly to poor physical and mental health that can extend into adulthood2,3. Impoverished environments have been shown to affect brain structure and function, particularly during development4–6. Further, there is evidence that early neurodevelopmental alterations may mediate the links between low socioeconomic status (SES) and both current and future negative health outcomes7–10. Such evidence implicates the brain as a potential target for intervention.

In children, low SES has been associated with lower cortical volumes, surface area, and thickness, as well as lower hippocampal volume11. Lower frontal gyri volumes and surface area further related to poorer cognition and more externalizing symptoms9,12–14. In contrast to the growing literature documenting SES-related differences in gray matter, studies on white matter remain scarce. While support exists for a link between low SES and compromised white matter microstructure in children15–20, findings diverge on which tracts are implicated, likely as a result of limited sample sizes and different SES measurements8,21. White matter tracts, which are primarily myelin-ensheathed axonal bundles connecting distal gray matter regions, are integral for long-range information processing22. For example, lower integrity in the superior longitudinal fasciculus and cingulum has been respectively associated with poorer working memory and greater psychopathology in youth23,24. During childhood and adolescence, white matter undergoes rapid myelination and microstructural organization and continues to mature well into young adulthood4,25. Such a protracted developmental window could allow long-lasting influences of low SES on white matter and, due to its functional relevance, warrants in-depth investigation.

A key question is how SES influences brain development. Proximal factors such as nutrition and environmental enrichment, amongst others, are theorized to be influenced by SES and thus could impact brain health7,8,26,27. Studies have recently demonstrated that unhealthy weight and poorer cognitive performance mediate associations between low SES and altered brain volumes and functional connectivity13,28,29. These studies used obesity measures as a proxy for diet and exercise13, and cognitive performance as a proxy for the social, sensory, and cognitive stimulation in the environment28,29. Furthermore, there may be multiple components of SES that influence the brain, potentially through different pathways. Recent findings suggest that SES indicators at both neighborhood-level (e.g., area deprivation index) and household-level (e.g., income, parental education), though correlated, do independently relate to children’s brain morphology and functional networks12,13,29–33. In terms of SES, families having the same income level may have access to different neighborhoods due to differences in local cost of living and/or structural racism barriers8. Proximally, neighborhood SES could reflect environmental (e.g., noise, pollution, crime) and/or social influences (e.g., interactions with teachers and peers), whereas household SES may reflect home characteristics such as material access and parenting practices7,8,27. However, it remains unknown how neighborhood and household SES relate to white matter development, and via what mechanisms. Identifying potential mediating factors within this framework may reveal important intervention targets to promote brain health in disadvantaged children.

Leveraging the multi-shell restriction spectrum imaging (RSI) model, we address these knowledge gaps by interrogating associations between SES and white matter microstructure in a large cross-sectional cohort of children aged 9-11 years from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study. RSI goes beyond traditional diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) by distinguishing restricted (originating intracellularly) from hindered (originating extracellularly) water diffusion within image voxels, thus modeling for greater tissue complexity34–37. Specifically, white matter microstructure was assessed using restricted normalized directional (RSI-RND), which models cylindrical intracellular water diffusion and purportedly reflects oriented axons/dendrites; and restricted normalized isotropic (RSI-RNI), which models spherical intracellular water diffusion and purportedly reflects glial/neuronal cell bodies36–40 (see Figure 1, adapted from Burnor et al. (2021), JAMA Netw Open). Given that socioeconomic deprivation has been linked to impaired myelination and heightened microglial activity6,20, we expected lower SES to be associated with decreased white matter RSI-RND and increased RSI-RNI. We further expected that greater neighborhood disadvantage and lower household SES (i.e., income, parental education) would independently relate to white matter microstructure, paralleling the independent associations that have been seen with gray matter and function. Given known links between obesity, cognition, and white matter microstructure in children41,42, we hypothesized that obesity measures and cognition would have indirect effects, independent for each SES indicator, on the associations between lower SES and altered white matter microstructure, thereby boosting the plausibility of these proximal factors being causal mediators and potentially motivating their management from both community and household angles.

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Schematic of RSI and DTI models

Note. Water diffusion patterns in white matter, measured in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, are shaped by the complex tissue microstructure that may constitute neurites (axons/dendrites), cell bodies (glial/neuronal), and extracellular space. Water diffusion occurs at different scales, subject to the barriers created by these processes. Traditional diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) characterizes the anisotropy of water diffusion in a single 3-dimensional model, and gives metrics of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD). Restriction spectrum imaging (RSI) however models intracellular/restricted diffusion (on a scale less than about 10 μm) and extracellular/hindered diffusion (on a scale greater than about 10 μm) separately. Within the intracellular/restricted compartment, it further separates cylindrical/directional diffusion (RND) from spherical/isotropic diffusion (RNI). These two metrics were normalized to the total diffusion signal, so that greater RSI-RND and RNI would respectively reflect greater relative signal contributions from directional and isotropic diffusion within a voxel. RSI offers greater insight to specific biological processes relative to DTI. In this study, RSI-RND and RNI were the primary white matter microstructure assessments, and DTI-FA and MD were estimated for reference. This image was adapted from Burnor et al. (2021). JAMA Netw Open. Under CC-BY license.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

Participants were from the ABCD Study, a ten-year cohort study tracking child brain development across 21 U.S. sites representing national demographics43,44. Participants receive annual physical, environmental, and behavioral assessments, as well as neuroimaging and cognitive testing every two years37,45–47. Institutional review boards at study sites approved procedures; parents/caregivers provided written consent and children gave verbal assent. Our study employed ABCD Study baseline data (release 4.0; collected between October 1st, 2016 and October 31st, 2018). In addition to the standard ABCD Study inclusion/exclusion criteria43, we excluded participants with 1) missing age, sex, or anthropometric data; 2) T1 or diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans that failed quality control or had clinically significant incidental findings37; and 3) history of severe neurological or psychiatric conditions (eMethods in the Supplement). We also excluded participants with history of diabetes or eating disorders that may confound with obesity-related neurobiological findings48. These additional criteria led to a sample of 8842 children from 11875 total. Description of participant selection is shown stepwise in eFigure 1 in the Supplement. This report follows the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.

2.2. Measures

Participant age, sex, race/ethnicity, and pubertal development stage (PDS)49 were collected; other measures are defined below (see eTable 1 in the Supplement for corresponding ABCD Study instrument names).

2.2.1. Neighborhood SES

The participant’s primary home address was geocoded into a census tract, from which the American Community Survey (2011-2015) Area Deprivation Index (ADI) estimates were extracted50. An exploratory factor analysis created a latent neighborhood disadvantage score that included 10 of all 17 ADI values (loadings ≥ 0.63; eTable 2 in the Supplement), consistent with previous reports12,29. ADI values that loaded less strongly generally reflected outdated (e.g., percentage of households without telephones) or market-dependent (e.g., median mortgage/rent) instead of contemporary, stable disadvantage and were excluded12,29,30. In the current study, higher neighborhood disadvantage scores would suggest lower education, income, property ownership, and higher unemployment, poverty, income disparity, and percentage of single-parent households, all at the community level.

2.2.2. Household SES

Household income was the combined annual income from all family members. As it was assessed in ordinal ranges, we used a reported procedure30 that divided the midpoint of each income bracket by $10000, creating a continuous variable. Parental education level was the highest education attainment amongst parents/caregivers, recoded into years of schooling estimated per U.S. convention following previous studies31,33 (eMethods in the Supplement).

2.2.3. Neuroimaging

Participants were scanned following standardized protocols across 3T scanner platforms (Siemens Prisma and Prisma Fit; GE Discovery MR750; and Philips Achieva dStream and Ingenia) at study sites47. T1-weighted structural images and multi-shell diffusion-weighted images (DWIs) were collected (see eMethods in the Supplement for specifications). Scans were processed centrally at the ABCD Data Analysis, Informatics, & Resource Center37. DWIs were corrected for eddy current, head motion, and susceptibility-induced distortions during preprocessing. Participant mean head motion during scanning was inferred from average DWI framewise displacement and was covaried in statistical analyses to partial out residual motion effects. Intracranial volumes (ICVs) were estimated from T1-weighted images. RSI was fitted to DWI-derived fiber orientation density functions to model RSI-RND and RNI, which were each normalized by total diffusion signal and served as the primary assessment of white matter microstructure in the present study. To evaluate the convergent validity of our novel RSI-derived results, we repeated analyses with DTI fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD). Previous work suggests a positive correspondence between RSI-RND and DTI-FA, both reflecting anisotropic diffusion, in development36, epilepsy51, and Alzheimer’s disease34. Low SES has been consistently associated with lower DTI-FA15–19, but findings have been mixed for DTI-MD. Thus, we expected similar pattern of results between RSI-RND and DTI-FA. Major white matter tracts were delineated by matching prior probabilities and diffusion orientations of fibers from AtlasTrack to individual DWIs37,52. RSI and DTI metrics were extracted from 31 tracts52, including the corpus callosum (CC) (with forceps major (Fmaj) and minor (Fmin) subregions) and bilateral fornix (Fx), cingulate cingulum (CgC), parahippocampal cingulum (CgH), corticospinal/pyramidal tract (CST), anterior thalamic radiations (ATR), uncinate fasciculus (Unc), inferior longitudinal fasciculus (ILF), inferior frontal-occipital fasciculus (IFOF), superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF) (with temporal (tSLF; i.e., arcuate fasciculus) and parietal (pSLF) subregions), superior-corticostriatal tract (SCS), striatal to inferior-frontal cortical tract (SIFC), and inferior-frontal to superior-frontal cortical tract (IFSFC). Visualizations of individual tracts are shown in eFigure 2 in the Supplement.

2.2.4. Obesity-related measures

Participant waist circumference, height, and weight were each averaged across up to three measurements. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated (weight(lbs)/height(in)2 × 703). Age and sex-corrected BMI z-scores were computed using the 2000 CDC growth charts53. We used different obesity-related measures to address their varied accuracy in reflecting adiposity in children54,55.

2.2.5. Cognitive performance

We assessed cognitive performance using the age-corrected total cognition score from the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery, summarized from seven tasks that probed executive functioning, memory, language abilities, and processing speed46 (see detailed description in eMethods in the Supplement). Follow-up analyses using individual task and crystallized and fluid cognition composite scores were conducted to explore any cognitive domain-specific effects.

2.3. Statistical analyses

All analyses were performed in R version 4.2.1 (R Project for Statistical Computing).

2.3.1. Handling of outliers and missing data

Outliers ± 4 SD away from the mean were removed. As the missingness in SES indicators seemed related to demographics (eFigure 3 in the Supplement), we imputed missing data 50 times using the “mice” package instead of excluding them56. Neuroimaging and cognitive variables, being primary outcomes, were not imputed (eTable 3 in the Supplement). Imputation did not bias data distribution (eTable 4 in the Supplement).

2.3.2. Harmonization of neuroimaging data

Technical differences between scanners accounted for substantial variance in RSI and DTI metrics (R2’s = 0.06 to 0.55, p’s < 0.001) and could contaminate statistical inference57. Because SES indicators were unevenly distributed across scanner sites (R2’s ≥ 0.09, p’s < 0.001), the convention of analyzing each scanner separately in multilevel modeling could underestimate meaningful SES-related variance. Instead, we harmonized RSI and DTI data using the batch-adjustment algorithm ComBat58, reducing scanner effects (post-harmonization R2’s ≤ 0.002 (> 30-fold reduction compared to pre-harmonization), p’s = 0.007 to 0.99) while retaining inherent associations between neuroimaging metrics and age, sex, race/ethnicity, PDS, and SES (eTable 5 in the Supplement).

2.3.3. Associations with SES

Associations between SES and white matter microstructure were assessed using linear mixed-effects models (“lme4” package59) in which neighborhood disadvantage, household income, and parental education were independent variables (IVs) included simultaneously and RSI or DTI metrics were dependent variables (DVs). Age, sex, PDS, ICV, and mean head motion were covaried due to potential confounding36,39,60, and family was modeled as a random effect. Associations between SES, obesity-related measures, and cognition were examined using the same procedure but without covarying for ICV and mean head motion. Because SES was highly entangled with race/ethnicity (eTable 6 in the Supplement), we did not adjust for race/ethnicity in models in order to preserve SES-related variance61. In follow-up analyses, covarying for race/ethnicity led to more restricted findings (eTable 10 in the Supplement). All models were checked for normality of residuals, homoscedasticity, and low multicollinearity (variance inflation factors were ≤ 1.89). Estimates were standardized β’s with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) pooled across imputed datasets. Multiple comparison correction was performed within each group of models and by each SES indicator using false discovery rate (FDR) at two-tailed pFDR ≤ 0.05. As missing neuroimaging and cognition data were not imputed, sample sizes varied across models and are reported in eTable 7 in the Supplement.

2.3.4. Sensitivity analyses

Associations between SES and white matter microstructure were further examined in subsamples that censored potential neuroimaging confounds: 1) participants with mean head motion ≤ 2.5 mm; 2) participants without adverse childhood experiences (e.g., trauma/abuse); 3) participants without common psychiatric diagnoses, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, and phobias; and 4) participants with full-term birth.

2.3.5. Testing for indirect effects

We estimated the indirect effects of SES on white matter microstructure through obesity-related measures and cognition using the “lavaan” package62. As we employed cross-sectional data, such analyses can establish the plausibility of factors as potential causal mediators that could be confirmed in future longitudinal studies. To reduce data dimensionality, principal component analyses (PCA) were applied to RSI or DTI metrics in tracts that demonstrated significant associations with SES. Structural equation models specified each of the SES indicators as IV, obesity-related measures or cognitive performance as mediator, and white matter microstructure principal components (PCs) as DVs. Covariates included the other SES indicators, age, sex, PDS, ICV, and mean head motion. As multilevel modeling was not feasible in “lavaan”, findings were confirmed in a random subsample of unrelated participants that eliminated possible family confounds (eTable 20 in the Supplement). Lastly, building upon previous research12,13,33, we studied additional models with white matter microstructure PCs as mediators and cognition as DV. Standardized estimates were computed with standard errors (SEs) and 95% CIs (from 20000 Monte Carlo simulations). Statistical significance was at two-tailed pFDR ≤ 0.05 corrected across all tested models.

3. Results

This study included 8842 children (4299 [48.6%] girls; mean age [SD], 9.9 [0.7] years); sample characteristics are detailed in Table 1. SES indicators were moderately correlated with each other (eFigure 4 in the Supplement).

View this table:
Table 1. Sample characteristics

3.1. Associations between SES and white matter microstructure

Higher SES was associated with greater RSI-RND, lower RSI-RNI, and greater DTI-FA in 9, 29, and 10 out of 31 tracts, respectively. Full statistics are shown in eTable 8 in the Supplement; key results are noted below. Findings largely survived sensitivity analyses (eTable 9 in the Supplement).

3.1.1. Associations with RSI-RND

Both neighborhood disadvantage and parental education had independent associations with white matter RSI-RND, overlapping in the SLF (Figure 2). Higher neighborhood disadvantage was associated with lower RSI-RND in Fmaj (β = -0.040; 95% CI: -0.067 to -0.013; pFDR = 0.03) and left SLF (β = -0.055; 95% CI: -0.081 to -0.028; pFDR = 0.001). Higher parental education was associated with greater RSI-RND in bilateral CST (e.g., right β = 0.042; 95% CI: 0.015 to 0.069; pFDR = 0.01) and SLF (e.g., right β = 0.053; 95% CI: 0.025 to 0.080; pFDR = 0.002). No independent associations were observed for household income.

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Associations between SES and white matter RSI-RND

Note. Greater neighborhood disadvantage and higher parental education were independently associated with lower and greater RSI-RND in specific white matter tracts, respectively. Tracts were visualized using the AtlasTrack atlas. The principal components (PCs) summarized RSI-RND in the relevant tracts, as associations did not differ qualitatively between tracts. In scatterplots, linear regression lines were adjusted for covariates and are flanked by shaded 95% confidence interval. Data points were standardized (std.) residuals extracted from a randomly selected imputed dataset as reference. Covariates included age, sex, pubertal development stage, intracranial volume, and head motion, and family was the random effect. Detailed statistics are shown in eTable 8 and 12 in the Supplement. RSI, restriction spectrum imaging; RND, restricted normalized directional; R, right; L, left; A, anterior; P, posterior; SES, socioeconomic status; CST, corticospinal/pyramidal tract; Fmaj, forceps major; SLF, superior longitudinal fasciculus, including temporal (t) and parietal (p) subregions.

3.1.2. Associations with RSI-RNI

All three SES indicators were independently associated with white matter RSI-RNI, with some spatial overlap of effects between household income and neighborhood disadvantage (Figure 3). Higher household income was associated with lower RSI-RNI in almost every tract (β’s = -0.062 to -0.031; pFDR’s = 0.002 to 0.05), except for bilateral Fx, Fmaj, right tSLF, and right SCS. Higher neighborhood disadvantage was associated with greater RSI-RNI in bilateral Fx (e.g., right β = 0.046; 95% CI: 0.019 to 0.074; pFDR = 0.01) and, overlapping with household income, in bilateral CgH (e.g., right β = 0.061; 95% CI: 0.034 to 0.088; pFDR < 0.001), CST (e.g., right β = 0.037; 95% CI: 0.010 to 0.065; pFDR = 0.03), and ATR (e.g., right β = 0.045; 95% CI: 0.018 to 0.072; pFDR = 0.01). Lastly, higher parental education was uniquely associated with lower RSI-RNI in Fmaj (β = -0.048; 95% CI: -0.077 to -0.020; pFDR = 0.03).

Figure 3.
Figure 3. Associations between SES and white matter RSI-RNI

Note. Greater neighborhood disadvantage, higher household income, and higher parental education were independently associated with greater, lower, and lower RSI-RNI in white matter tracts, respectively. Widespread effects were seen for household income. Tracts were visualized using the AtlasTrack atlas. The principal components (PCs) summarized RSI-RNI in the relevant tracts, as associations did not differ qualitatively between tracts. In scatterplots, linear regression lines were adjusted for covariates and are flanked by shaded 95% confidence interval. Data points were standardized (std.) residuals extracted from a randomly selected imputed dataset as reference. Covariates included age, sex, pubertal development stage, intracranial volume, and head motion, and family was the random effect. Detailed statistics are shown in eTable 8 and 12 in the Supplement. RSI, restriction spectrum imaging; RNI, restricted normalized isotropic; R, right; L, left; A, anterior; P, posterior; SES, socioeconomic status; Fx, fornix; CgC, cingulate cingulum; CgH, parahippocampal cingulum; CST, corticospinal/pyramidal tract; ATR, anterior thalamic radiations; Unc, uncinate fasciculus; ILF, inferior longitudinal fasciculus; IFOF, inferior frontal-occipital fasciculus; Fmaj, forceps major; Fmin, forceps minor; CC, corpus callosum; SLF, superior longitudinal fasciculus, including temporal (t) and parietal (p) subregions; SCS, superior-corticostriatal tract; SIFC, striatal to inferior-frontal cortical tract; IFSFC, inferior-frontal to superior-frontal cortical tract.

3.1.3. Associations with DTI-FA and MD

Associations between SES and DTI-FA largely resembled those with RSI-RND. Higher neighborhood disadvantage had independent associations with lower RSI-RND in the left SLF, and higher parental education with greater RSI-RND in left Fx, bilateral CST, bilateral SLF, and left SCS (eFigure 5 in the Supplement). Household income was not associated with DTI-FA, nor was any SES indicator with DTI-MD.

3.2. Analyses of indirect effects

In each PCA summarizing each independent SES indicator and RSI/DTI metric association, the first PC carried substantial loadings from all involved tracts, captured 58% to 95% of variance, and were related to the SES indicator as individual tracts did (eTable 11 and 12 in the Supplement). These first PCs were thus used in indirect effects models. All models demonstrated good fit (eTable 17 in the Supplement).

3.2.1. Indirect effects via obesity-related measures

Lower SES indexed by all three SES indicators had independent associations with higher values of all obesity-related measures (eTable 13 in the Supplement). Higher BMI had indirect effects on the associations between higher neighborhood disadvantage and lower RSI-RND PC and greater RSI-RNI PC; between lower household income and greater RSI-RNI PC; and between lower parental education and lower RSI-RND PC and greater RSI-RNI in Fmaj (Figure 4A). No effect was observed with DTI-FA PCs. Consistent results were seen with waist circumference and BMI z-scores. Full statistics are in eTable 14 in the Supplement.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Indirect effects of obesity-related measures and neurocognition in the associations between SES and white matter microstructure

Note. Body mass index (BMI) and total cognition score constituted significant partial indirect effects between the associations between socioeconomic status (SES) indicators and white matter microstructure. For BMI, consistent results were seen with BMI z-scores and waist circumference. For cognitive performance, findings were mostly similar with individual task and composite scores. In each model, structural equation modeling covariates included age, sex, pubertal development stage, intracranial volume, and head motion, as well as the SES indicators that were not the independent variable (e.g., household income and parental education were covariates in models concerning neighborhood disadvantage). Detailed statistics are shown in eTable 14 and 16 in the Supplement, and model fit indices are in eTable 17. **, p ≤ 0.01; ***, p ≤ 0.001. For indirect effects, p-values were corrected using false discovery rate (FDR). RSI, restriction spectrum imaging; RND, restricted normalized directional; RNI, restricted normalized isotropic; PC, principal component; Fmaj, forceps major; DTI, diffusion tensor imaging; FA, fractional anisotropy.

3.2.2. Indirect effects via cognitive performance

Lower SES indexed by all three SES indicators was independently associated with lower total cognition score (eTable 15 in the Supplement). Lower total cognition score had indirect effects on the associations between higher neighborhood disadvantage and lower RSI-RND and DTI-FA PCs. Conversely, higher total cognition score had indirect effects on the associations between higher parental education and greater RSI-RND and DTI-FA PCs (Figure 4B; full statistics in eTable 16 in the Supplement). The total cognition score was not related to RSI-RNI PCs and was not tested for indirect effects in these models. Results were consistent across most analyses with composite and individual task scores, suggesting that our observed indirect effects related to general cognition rather than certain domains (eTable 18 in the Supplement). In models where cognition was the DV, we observed indirect effects of greater RSI-RND PCs and greater DTI-FA PCs between higher SES and better cognition, again broadly across cognitive domains (eTable 19 in the Supplement).

4. Discussion

In a large group of 9 to 11-year-old children, we found that greater neighborhood disadvantage and lower household SES related independently and robustly with lower RSI-RND, greater RSI-RNI, and lower DTI-FA in partially overlapping white matter regions. Furthermore, there was evidence for indirect effects of SES, whereby greater BMI and related anthropometrics, as well as poorer cognitive performance, partially explained associations between lower SES and altered white matter microstructure. Given the size and demographic diversity of our sample, these results suggest a potentially generalizable pattern that both neighborhood and household SES may be important for white matter development in children. Future research should investigate obesity and cognition as potential mechanistic mediators.

Higher SES was associated with greater RSI-RND in the SLF, Fmaj, and CST. As RSI-RND models anisotropic intracellular water diffusion35, these findings might reflect more oriented axonal/dendritic organization in these tracts4,36,40. Such interpretation parallels observations with DTI-FA, a traditional indicator of white matter integrity36, and is consistent with previous evidence of greater DTI-FA in the SLF16,18,63,64 and CST18,64 in children from high SES families. The integrity of these tracts have been implicated in cognition: the SLF is linked to language abilities, social cognition, and visuospatial attention64,65, and the Fmaj to gross memory functioning66. The CST, primarily a motor pathway, finetunes somatosensory-motor information integration necessary for fast processing speed67. Correspondingly, we found that higher cognition scores partially explained the links between higher SES and greater RSI-RND. This effect appeared general and not limited to particular cognitive domains, echoing the tracts’ wide functional relevance. This pathway might represent the level of cognitive stimulation a child receives, which has been shown to be higher in high SES families26,27,68–70. Nonetheless, our cross-sectional data precludes inference of directionality, and our models with white matter microstructure as the mediator supported the equal plausibility that SES may impact brain outcomes first and in turn contribute to cognition12,13. Cognitive performance also likely has both social (i.e., school, family) and neurobiological (i.e., brain-supported functioning) foundations that would position cognition as either a contributor to or consequence of brain development26–28, and future research may dissociate these effects using more specific measurements. Additionally, because morphometry in certain regions connected to the SLF (e.g., superior frontal-parietal cortices), CST (e.g., precentral gyrus), and Fmaj (e.g., occipital lobes) has similarly exhibited associations with SES and cognition in children12–14,28,30,32,33, our findings in white matter might reflect developmental interactions with gray matter instead of an isolated process71.

In comparison to the localized effects seen with RSI-RND, lower SES was associated with greater RSI-RNI in almost every white matter tract. Given that RSI-RNI measured spherical intracellular diffusion35, these widespread associations hint that SES might modulate glial/neuronal cell presence in a brain-wide fashion. Our observation that greater BMI and related anthropometrics partially accounted for these associations provides insights to some potential mechanisms. First, obesity induces systemic inflammation, which upregulates circulating pro-inflammatory molecules72 that may infiltrate brain tissue through a weakened blood-brain barrier73,74. As an immune response, the brain’s astrocytes and microglia undergo “reactive gliosis”, a process marked by their proliferation and enlargement as seen in rodent models of obesity74–78. In diffusion MRI models, such neuroinflammatory phenotype may manifest as increases in isotropic intracellular signals, a phenomenon observed in the striatum39,42,79 and recently hypothalamus and diffuse white matter tracts42 in childhood obesity. Thus, it is possible that low SES might be related to neuroinflammation via obesity incidence. Additionally, microglia dysregulation may cause myelin damage80,81, which could explain the observed association between obesity and RSI-RND. Second, because RSI-RNI increases with normative child development36, our findings of greater RSI-RNI, which were corrected for age, may represent accelerated white matter maturation with socioeconomic disadvantage. This interpretation echoes reports of higher gray matter-derived brain-predicted age amongst low-SES early adolescents82–84 and parallels the stress acceleration hypothesis, which proposes prioritized neuroadaptation to deprivation and adversity85. Indeed, the largest RSI-RNI effects were seen in frontolimbic pathways (Fx, CgH, ATR, and Unc) relevant for emotion processing, stress, and depression86–88. Notably, obesity has been linked to earlier pubertal onset89 and advanced brain aging90,91, and thus might embody a way SES impacts brain development. Future animal research comparing RSI to cellular/tissue imaging may help elucidate the exact neurobiological basis underlying our observed SES-related white matter microstructural changes.

The plausibility of obesity and cognitive performance being mediators linking SES to white matter microstructure, if confirmed in future longitudinal studies, may support their intervention to promote brain health in low-SES children. Weight loss has been shown to increase cortical volumes and white matter density92,93, attenuate neuroinflammation94, and normalize μ-opioid receptor availability95. Similar effects were also seen following low-fat dieting96 and aerobic training97. In the same vein, environments enriched in social and sensory stimuli are known to promote myelination in hypoxic rodents68 and aging adults69. Critically, because both neighborhood and household SES were independently associated with white matter microstructure, a distinction that continued in our indirect effects models, interventions may need to be conceptualized from multiple socioeconomic angles. At the neighborhood level, improved access to healthy food outlets and playgrounds may limit obesity amongst children living in low-SES areas98,99. Household factors such as buying power and health awareness, which might influence the child’s diet choice and participation in sports, are also important for maintaining healthy weight99,100. For cognition, sports and music programs in schools have been observed to improve academic achievement and cognitive performance in participating children101,102. At home, enriching parent-child interactions, such as reading and play, are known to benefit children’s long-term cognitive and overall well-being103,104. Crucially, many of these potential proximal mechanisms, whether through neighborhoods or households, are filtered through structural forces such as occupation, market, allocation of government resources, etc., and thus their management should be considered in terms of broad social policy. Further research is warranted to characterize the specific impact of these factors, together with other unexplored ones such as crime and pollution exposure7,8,38, on brain development.

4.1. Limitations

This study has limitations. First, the cross-sectional design precludes causal inference, and it is unknown whether our SES-related findings represent temporary or long-term developmental differences. Longitudinal investigations will be particularly meaningful, as our white matter observations, small in magnitude now, may accumulate over time105 and relate to future disease status9,24. Second, SES indicators, especially education attainment, also have genetic backgrounds106,107, and research is needed to dissociate the environmental from genetic contributions to white matter development. However, both genetics and environment influence white matter microstructure, with the former’s influence decreasing and the latter’s increasing from adolescence to adulthood25,108. Third, as many low-SES children had greater white matter integrity than their high-SES peers, our SES indicators were not predictors of white matter development at the individual level; rather, their small effects were seen in a large, population-based sample. Future studies are also encouraged to examine other SES-related facets, as well as their potential interactions32. Lastly, we only studied major white matter tracts due to the higher reliability of RSI and diffusion-weighted MRI models in these regions, and studies are needed to examine whether our findings extend to superficial/peri-cortical white matter.

5. Conclusions

To our knowledge, our study is the first large, multi-site investigation to find that both neighborhood and household socioeconomic adversity are associated with alterations in white matter microstructure in children. These independent associations could be partially explained by obesity and cognition, which may be targets for interventions from multiple socioeconomic angles to improve white matter health in disadvantaged children. Our findings join previous research on gray matter12–14,28–32,109 to highlight the complex pathways through which SES might influence brain development.

Data Availability

Data in this study were from the baseline measurements published in 2021 as part of the ABCD Curated Data Release 4.0, available at DOI: 10.15154/1523041. The ABCD data repository grows and may be modified as more data are collected and processed. This study is available in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA) at DOI: 10.15154/1528516.

Author Contributions

Mr. Li had full access to all data in the present study and assumes responsibility for data integrity and accuracy of data analysis.

Concept and design: Li, Cai, Marek, Hershey.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.

Drafting of the manuscript: Li.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Li, Marek, Hershey.

Obtained funding: Li, Marek, Hershey.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Marek, Hershey.

Supervision: Marek, Hershey.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

None reported.

Funding/Support

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant R00MH121518 (Marek), the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology Summer Research Program (Li), the Society for Neuroscience Trainee Professional Development Award (Li), and the WUSTL McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience. The ABCD Study is supported by the NIH and federal partners (awards U01DA041048, U01DA050989, U01DA051016, U01DA041022, U01DA051018, U01DA051037, U01DA050987, U01DA041174, U01DA041106, U01DA041117, U01DA041028, U01DA041134, U01DA050988, U01DA051039, U01DA041156, U01DA041025, U01DA041120, U01DA051038, U01DA041148, U01DA041093, U01DA041089, U24DA041123, and U24DA041147). A full list of supporters is available at https://abcdstudy.org/federal-partners.html.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, preparation of the manuscript, or decision to publish.

Disclaimer

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or other funders.

Additional Contributions

The authors thank Jerrel Rutlin, BS, Ashley Sanders, PhD, Amjad Samara, MD, and Xuanhe “Dahlia” Qi, BA for the meaningful discussions.

Additional Information

Data in this study were from the baseline measurements published in 2021 as part of the ABCD Curated Data Release 4.0, available at DOI: 10.15154/1523041. The ABCD data repository grows and may be modified as more data are collected and processed. This study is available in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA) at DOI: 10.15154/1528516.

Abbreviations

ABCD
Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development
ADI
area deprivation index
ATR
anterior thalamic radiations
BMI
body mass index
CC
corpus callosum
CgC
cingulate cingulum
CgH
parahippocampal cingulum
CI
confidence interval
CST
corticospinal/pyramidal tract
DTI
diffusion tensor imaging
DV
dependent variable
DWI
diffusion-weighted image
FA
fractional anisotropy
FDR
false discovery rate
Fmaj
forceps major
Fmin
forceps minor
Fx
fornix
ICV
intracranial volumes
IFOF
inferior frontal-occipital fasciculus
IFSFC
inferior-frontal to superior-frontal cortical tract
ILF
inferior longitudinal fasciculus
IV
independent variable
MD
mean diffusivity
MRI
magnetic resonance imaging
PC
principal component
PCA
principal component analyses
PDS
pubertal development stage
pSLF
parietal superior longitudinal fasciculus
RND
restricted normalized directional
RNI
restricted normalized isotropic
RSI
restriction spectrum imaging
SCS
superior-corticostriatal tract
SD
standard deviation
SE
standard error
SES
socioeconomic status
SIFC
striatal to inferior-frontal cortical tract
SLF
superior longitudinal fasciculus
STROBE
Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology
tSLF
temporal superior longitudinal fasciculus
Unc
uncinate fasciculus

References

  1. 1.↵
    US Census Bureau. Poverty in the United States: 2021.; 2022.
  2. 2.↵
    McLaughlin KA, Breslau J, Green JG, et al. Childhood socio-economic status and the onset, persistence, and severity of DSM-IV mental disorders in a US national sample. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73(7):1088–1096. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.06.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Poulton R, Caspi A, Milne BJ, et al. Association between children’s experience of socioeconomic disadvantage and adult health: a life-course study. Lancet (London, England). 2002;360(9346):1640–1645. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11602-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    Bethlehem RAI, Seidlitz J, White SR, et al. Brain charts for the human lifespan. Nature. 2022;604(7906):525–533. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04554-y
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.
    Knudsen EI. Sensitive periods in the development of the brain and behavior. J Cogn Neurosci. 2004;16(8):1412–1425. doi:10.1162/0898929042304796
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    Réus GZ, Silva RH, de Moura AB, et al. Early Maternal Deprivation Induces Microglial Activation, Alters Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein Immunoreactivity and Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase during the Development of Offspring Rats. Mol Neurobiol. 2019;56(2):1096–1108. doi:10.1007/s12035-018-1161-2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. 7.↵
    Hackman DA, Farah MJ, Meaney MJ. Socioeconomic status and the brain: mechanistic insights from human and animal research. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010;11(9):651–659. doi:10.1038/nrn2897
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    Farah MJ. The Neuroscience of Socioeconomic Status: Correlates, Causes, and Consequences. Neuron. 2017;96(1):56–71. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.08.034
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Kim HH, McLaughlin KA, Chibnik LB, Koenen KC, Tiemeier H. Poverty, Cortical Structure, and Psychopathologic Characteristics in Adolescence. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(11):e2244049–e2244049. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.44049
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    Barch DM, Donohue MR, Elsayed NM, et al. Early Childhood Socioeconomic Status and Cognitive and Adaptive Outcomes at the Transition to Adulthood: The Mediating Role of Gray Matter Development Across Five Scan Waves. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2022;7(1):34–44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2021.07.002
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    Rakesh D, Whittle S. Socioeconomic status and the developing brain – A systematic review of neuroimaging findings in youth. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;130:379-407. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.08.027
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.↵
    Taylor RL, Cooper SR, Jackson JJ, Barch DM. Assessment of Neighborhood Poverty, Cognitive Function, and Prefrontal and Hippocampal Volumes in Children. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(11):e2023774–e2023774. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.23774
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    Dennis E, Manza P, Volkow ND. Socioeconomic status, BMI, and brain development in children. Transl Psychiatry. 2022;12(1):33. doi:10.1038/s41398-022-01779-3
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    Noble KG, Houston SM, Brito NH, et al. Family income, parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18(5):773–778. doi:10.1038/nn.3983
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    Ursache A, Noble KG, the Pediatric Imaging N and GS. Socioeconomic status, white matter, and executive function in children. Brain Behav. 2016;6(10):e00531. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.531
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    Rosen ML, Sheridan MA, Sambrook KA, Meltzoff AN, McLaughlin KA. Socioeconomic disparities in academic achievement: A multi-modal investigation of neural mechanisms in children and adolescents. Neuroimage. 2018;173:298–310. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.02.043
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.
    Ozernov-Palchik O, Norton ES, Wang Y, et al. The relationship between socioeconomic status and white matter microstructure in pre-reading children: A longitudinal investigation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2019;40(3):741–754. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24407
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    Dufford AJ, Kim P. Family Income, Cumulative Risk Exposure, and White Matter Structure in Middle Childhood. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00547.
  19. 19.↵
    Vanderauwera J, van Setten ERH, Maurits NM, Maassen BAM. The interplay of socio-economic status represented by paternal educational level, white matter structure and reading. PLoS One. 2019;14(5):e0215560. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215560.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    Ziegler G, Moutoussis M, Hauser TU, et al. Childhood socio-economic disadvantage predicts reduced myelin growth across adolescence and young adulthood. Hum Brain Mapp. 2020;41(12):3392–3402. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25024
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Marek S, Tervo-Clemmens B, Calabro FJ, et al. Reproducible brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals. Nature. 2022;603(7902):654–660. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04492-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    Gläscher J, Rudrauf D, Colom R, et al. Distributed neural system for general intelligence revealed by lesion mapping. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2010;107(10):4705–4709. doi:10.1073/pnas.0910397107
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    Vestergaard M, Madsen KS, Baaré WFC, et al. White Matter Microstructure in Superior Longitudinal Fasciculus Associated with Spatial Working Memory Performance in Children. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011;23(9):2135–2146. doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21592
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    Vanes LD, Moutoussis M, Ziegler G, et al. White matter tract myelin maturation and its association with general psychopathology in adolescence and early adulthood. Hum Brain Mapp. 2020;41(3):827–839. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24842
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    Lebel C, Deoni S. The development of brain white matter microstructure. Neuroimage. 2018;182:207–218. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.097
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    Hyde LW, Gard AM, Tomlinson RC, Burt SA, Mitchell C, Monk CS. An ecological approach to understanding the developing brain: Examples linking poverty, parenting, neighborhoods, and the brain. Am Psychol. 2020;75(9):1245–1259. doi:10.1037/amp0000741
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. 27.↵
    Ursache A, Noble KG. Neurocognitive development in socioeconomic context: Multiple mechanisms and implications for measuring socioeconomic status. Psychophysiology. 2016;53(1):71–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12547
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    Tomasi D, Volkow ND. Associations of family income with cognition and brain structure in USA children: prevention implications. Mol Psychiatry. 2021;26(11):6619–6629. doi:10.1038/s41380-021-01130-0
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  29. 29.↵
    Sripada C, Gard AM, Angstadt M, et al. Socioeconomic resources are associated with distributed alterations of the brain’s intrinsic functional architecture in youth. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2022;58:101164. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101164
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    Hackman DA, Cserbik D, Chen J-C, et al. Association of Local Variation in Neighborhood Disadvantage in Metropolitan Areas With Youth Neurocognition and Brain Structure. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(8):e210426–e210426. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.0426
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    Rakesh D, Zalesky A, Whittle S. Similar but distinct – Effects of different socioeconomic indicators on resting state functional connectivity: Findings from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study®. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2021;51:101005. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101005
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    Rakesh D, Zalesky A, Whittle S. Assessment of Parent Income and Education, Neighborhood Disadvantage, and Child Brain Structure. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(8):e2226208–e2226208. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.26208
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  33. 33.↵
    Vargas T, Damme KSF, Mittal VA. Neighborhood deprivation, prefrontal morphology and neurocognition in late childhood to early adolescence. Neuroimage. 2020;220:117086. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117086
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    Reas ET, Hagler DJ, White NS, et al. Sensitivity of restriction spectrum imaging to memory and neuropathology in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017;9(1):55. doi:10.1186/s13195-017-0281-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    White NS, Leergaard TB, D’Arceuil H, Bjaalie JG, Dale AM. Probing tissue microstructure with restriction spectrum imaging: Histological and theoretical validation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2013;34(2):327–346. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.21454
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    Palmer CE, Pecheva D, Iversen JR, et al. Microstructural development from 9 to 14 years: Evidence from the ABCD Study. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2022;53:101044. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101044
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    Hagler DJ, Hatton S, Cornejo MD, et al. Image processing and analysis methods for the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. Neuroimage. 2019;202:116091. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116091
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    Burnor E, Cserbik D, Cotter DL, et al. Association of Outdoor Ambient Fine Particulate Matter With Intracellular White Matter Microstructural Properties Among Children. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(12):e2138300–e2138300. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.38300
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. 39.↵
    Rapuano KM, Laurent JS, Hagler DJ, et al. Nucleus accumbens cytoarchitecture predicts weight gain in children. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2020;117(43):26977–26984. doi:10.1073/pnas.2007918117
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    Fan CC, Loughnan R, Makowski C, et al. Multivariate genome-wide association study on tissue-sensitive diffusion metrics highlights pathways that shape the human brain. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):2423. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-30110-3
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. 41.↵
    Chaddock-Heyman L, Erickson KI, Voss MW, et al. White matter microstructure is associated with cognitive control in children. Biol Psychol. 2013;94(1):109–115. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.05.008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    Li Z, Samara A, Ray MK, et al. Childhood obesity is linked to putative neuroinflammation in brain white matter, hypothalamus, and striatum. medRxiv. 2022. doi:10.1101/2022.09.01.22279506
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. 43.↵
    Garavan H, Bartsch H, Conway K, et al. Recruiting the ABCD sample: Design considerations and procedures. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32:16–22. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.04.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    Volkow ND, Koob GF, Croyle RT, et al. The conception of the ABCD study: From substance use to a broad NIH collaboration. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32:4–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2017.10.002
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    Barch DM, Albaugh MD, Avenevoli S, et al. Demographic, physical and mental health assessments in the adolescent brain and cognitive development study: Rationale and description. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32:55–66. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2017.10.010
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    Luciana M, Bjork JM, Nagel BJ, et al. Adolescent neurocognitive development and impacts of substance use: Overview of the adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) baseline neurocognition battery. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32:67–79. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.02.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    Casey BJ, Cannonier T, Conley MI, et al. The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study: Imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2018;32:43–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2018.03.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    McCuen-Wurst C, Ruggieri M, Allison KC. Disordered eating and obesity: associations between binge-eating disorder, night-eating syndrome, and weight-related comorbidities. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018;1411(1):96–105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13467
    OpenUrlPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    Carskadon MA, Acebo C. A self-administered rating scale for pubertal development. J Adolesc Heal. 1993;14(3):190–195. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/1054-139X(93)90004-9
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    Singh GK. Area Deprivation and Widening Inequalities in US Mortality, 1969–1998. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(7):1137–1143. doi:10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1137
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  51. 51.↵
    Loi RQ, Leyden KM, Balachandra A, et al. Restriction spectrum imaging reveals decreased neurite density in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2016;57(11):1897–1906. doi:10.1111/epi.13570
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  52. 52.↵
    Hagler Jr. DJ, Ahmadi ME, Kuperman J, et al. Automated white-matter tractography using a probabilistic diffusion tensor atlas: Application to temporal lobe epilepsy. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30(5):1535–1547. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20619
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  53. 53.↵
    Kuczmarski RJ, Ogden CL, Guo SS, et al. 2000 CDC Growth Charts for the United States: methods and development. Vital Health Stat 11. 2002;(246):1–190.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    Taylor RW, Jones IE, Williams SM, Goulding A. Evaluation of waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, and the conicity index as screening tools for high trunk fat mass, as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, in children aged 3-19 y. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;72(2):490–495. doi:10.1093/ajcn/72.2.490
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. 55.↵
    Cole TJ, Faith MS, Pietrobelli A, Heo M. What is the best measure of adiposity change in growing children: BMI, BMI %, BMI z-score or BMI centile? Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59(3):419–425. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602090
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  56. 56.↵
    van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. J Stat Softw. 2011;45(3 SE-Articles):1–67. doi:10.18637/jss.v045.i03
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. 57.↵
    Zhu T, Hu R, Qiu X, et al. Quantification of accuracy and precision of multi-center DTI measurements: A diffusion phantom and human brain study. Neuroimage. 2011;56(3):1398–1411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.010
    OpenUrl
  58. 58.↵
    Fortin J-P, Parker D, Tunç B, et al. Harmonization of multi-site diffusion tensor imaging data. Neuroimage. 2017;161:149–170. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.047
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.↵
    Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Software; Vol 1, Issue 1. October 2015. https://www.jstatsoft.org/v067/i01.
  60. 60.↵
    Lawrence KE, Abaryan Z, Laltoo E, et al. White matter microstructure shows sex differences in late childhood: Evidence from 6797 children. Hum Brain Mapp. 2022;n/a(n/a). doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26079
  61. 61.↵
    Dumornay NM, Lebois LAM, Ressler KJ, Harnett NG. Racial Disparities in Adversity During Childhood and the False Appearance of Race-Related Differences in Brain Structure. Am J Psychiatry. 2023;180(2):127–138. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.21090961
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  62. 62.↵
    Rosseel Y. lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. J Stat Softw. 2012;48(2).
  63. 63.↵
    Dufford AJ, Evans GW, Dmitrieva J, Swain JE, Liberzon I, Kim P. Prospective associations, longitudinal patterns of childhood socioeconomic status, and white matter organization in adulthood. Hum Brain Mapp. 2020;41(13):3580–3593. doi:10.1002/hbm.25031
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  64. 64.↵
    Gullick MM, Demir-Lira ÖE, Booth JR. Reading skill–fractional anisotropy relationships in visuospatial tracts diverge depending on socioeconomic status. Dev Sci. 2016;19(4):673–685. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12428
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  65. 65.↵
    Nakajima R, Kinoshita M, Shinohara H, Nakada M. The superior longitudinal fascicle: reconsidering the fronto-parietal neural network based on anatomy and function. Brain Imaging Behav. 2020;14(6):2817–2830. doi:10.1007/s11682-019-00187-4
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  66. 66.↵
    Luo C, Li M, Qin R, et al. White Matter Microstructural Damage as an Early Sign of Subjective Cognitive Decline. Front Aging Neurosci. 2020;11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00378.
  67. 67.↵
    Duering M, Gonik M, Malik R, et al. Identification of a strategic brain network underlying processing speed deficits in vascular cognitive impairment. Neuroimage. 2013;66:177–183. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.084
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. 68.↵
    Forbes TA, Goldstein EZ, Dupree JL, et al. Environmental enrichment ameliorates perinatal brain injury and promotes functional white matter recovery. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):964. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14762-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.↵
    Yang S, Lu W, Zhou D-S, Tang Y. Enriched Environment and White Matter in Aging Brain. Anat Rec. 2012;295(9):1406–1414. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.22526
    OpenUrl
  70. 70.↵
    Fields RD. White matter in learning, cognition and psychiatric disorders. Trends Neurosci. 2008;31(7):361–370. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2008.04.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  71. 71.↵
    Zhang K, Sejnowski TJ. A universal scaling law between gray matter and white matter of cerebral cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2000;97(10):5621–5626. doi:10.1073/pnas.090504197
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. 72.↵
    Gregor MF, Hotamisligil GS. Inflammatory Mechanisms in Obesity. Annu Rev Immunol. 2011;29(1):415–445. doi:10.1146/annurev-immunol-031210-101322
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  73. 73.↵
    Stranahan AM, Hao S, Dey A, Yu X, Baban B. Blood-brain barrier breakdown promotes macrophage infiltration and cognitive impairment in leptin receptor-deficient mice. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2016;36(12):2108–2121. doi:10.1177/0271678X16642233
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. 74.↵
    Guillemot-Legris O, Muccioli GG. Obesity-Induced Neuroinflammation: Beyond the Hypothalamus. Trends Neurosci. 2017;40(4):237–253. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2017.02.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. 75.
    Baufeld C, Osterloh A, Prokop S, Miller KR, Heppner FL. High-fat diet-induced brain region-specific phenotypic spectrum of CNS resident microglia. Acta Neuropathol. 2016;132(3):361–375. doi:10.1007/s00401-016-1595-4
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  76. 76.
    Guillemot-Legris O, Masquelier J, Everard A, Cani PD, Alhouayek M, Muccioli GG. High-fat diet feeding differentially affects the development of inflammation in the central nervous system. J Neuroinflammation. 2016;13(1):206. doi:10.1186/s12974-016-0666-8
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  77. 77.
    Macedo F, dos Santos LS, Glezer I, da Cunha FM. Brain Innate Immune Response in Diet-Induced Obesity as a Paradigm for Metabolic Influence on Inflammatory Signaling. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:342. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2019.00342.
    OpenUrl
  78. 78.↵
    Décarie-Spain L, Sharma S, Hryhorczuk C, et al. Nucleus accumbens inflammation mediates anxiodepressive behavior and compulsive sucrose seeking elicited by saturated dietary fat. Mol Metab. 2018;10:1–13. doi:10.1016/j.molmet.2018.01.018
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. 79.↵
    Rapuano KM, Berrian N, Baskin-Sommers A, et al. Longitudinal Evidence of a Vicious Cycle Between Nucleus Accumbens Microstructure and Childhood Weight Gain. J Adolesc Heal. 2022. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2022.01.002
  80. 80.↵
    Briones TL, Woods J. Dysregulation in myelination mediated by persistent neuroinflammation: Possible mechanisms in chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment. Brain Behav Immun. 2014;35:23–32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2013.07.175
    OpenUrl
  81. 81.↵
    McNamara NB, Munro DAD, Bestard-Cuche N, et al. Microglia regulate central nervous system myelin growth and integrity. Nature. 2023;613(7942):120–129. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05534-y
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  82. 82.↵
    Drobinin V, Van Gestel H, Helmick CA, Schmidt MH, Bowen C V, Uher R. The Developmental Brain Age Is Associated With Adversity, Depression, and Functional Outcomes Among Adolescents. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2022;7(4):406–414. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2021.09.004
    OpenUrl
  83. 83.
    Colich NL, Rosen ML, Williams ES, McLaughlin KA. Biological aging in childhood and adolescence following experiences of threat and deprivation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2020;146(9):721–764. doi:10.1037/bul0000270
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  84. 84.↵
    Rakesh D, Cropley V, Zalesky A, Vijayakumar N, Allen NB, Whittle S. Neighborhood disadvantage and longitudinal brain-predicted-age trajectory during adolescence. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2021;51:101002. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101002
    OpenUrl
  85. 85.↵
    Callaghan BL, Tottenham N. The Stress Acceleration Hypothesis: Effects of early-life adversity on emotion circuits and behavior. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2016;7:76–81. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.11.018
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  86. 86.↵
    Lean RE, Smyser CD, Brady RG, et al. Prenatal exposure to maternal social disadvantage and psychosocial stress and neonatal white matter connectivity at birth. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2022;119(42):e2204135119. doi:10.1073/pnas.2204135119
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  87. 87.
    Barch DM, Hua X, Kandala S, et al. White matter alterations associated with lifetime and current depression in adolescents: Evidence for cingulum disruptions. Depress Anxiety. 2022;39(12):881–890. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/da.23294
    OpenUrl
  88. 88.↵
    Lai C-H, Wu Y-T. Alterations in white matter micro-integrity of the superior longitudinal fasciculus and anterior thalamic radiation of young adult patients with depression. Psychol Med. 2014;44(13):2825–2832. doi:DOI: 10.1017/S0033291714000440
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  89. 89.↵
    Ahmed ML, Ong KK, Dunger DB. Childhood obesity and the timing of puberty. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2009;20(5):237–242. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2009.02.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  90. 90.↵
    Opel N, Thalamuthu A, Milaneschi Y, et al. Brain structural abnormalities in obesity: relation to age, genetic risk, and common psychiatric disorders. Mol Psychiatry. 2021;26(9):4839–4852. doi:10.1038/s41380-020-0774-9
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  91. 91.↵
    Ronan L, Alexander-Bloch AF, Wagstyl K, et al. Obesity associated with increased brain age from midlife. Neurobiol Aging. 2016;47:63–70. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2016.07.010
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  92. 92.↵
    Prehn K, Jumpertz von Schwartzenberg R, Mai K, et al. Caloric Restriction in Older Adults—Differential Effects of Weight Loss and Reduced Weight on Brain Structure and Function. Cereb Cortex. 2017;27(3):1765–1778. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhw008
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. 93.↵
    Tuulari JJ, Karlsson HK, Antikainen O, et al. Bariatric Surgery Induces White and Grey Matter Density Recovery in the Morbidly Obese: A Voxel-Based Morphometric Study. Hum Brain Mapp. 2016;37(11):3745–3756. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23272
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. 94.↵
    Moreno-Navarrete JM, Blasco G, Puig J, et al. Neuroinflammation in obesity: circulating lipopolysaccharide-binding protein associates with brain structure and cognitive performance. Int J Obes. 2017;41(11):1627–1635. doi:10.1038/ijo.2017.162
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  95. 95.↵
    Karlsson HK, Tuulari JJ, Tuominen L, et al. Weight loss after bariatric surgery normalizes brain opioid receptors in morbid obesity. Mol Psychiatry. 2016;21(8):1057–1062. doi:10.1038/mp.2015.153
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  96. 96.↵
    Arjmand G, Abbas-Zadeh M, Eftekhari MH. Effect of MIND diet intervention on cognitive performance and brain structure in healthy obese women: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):2871. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-04258-9
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  97. 97.↵
    Krafft CE, Schaeffer DJ, Schwarz NF, et al. Improved frontoparietal white matter integrity in overweight children is associated with attendance at an after-school exercise program. Dev Neurosci. 2014;36(1):1–9. doi:10.1159/000356219
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.↵
    Macdonald L, Cummins S, Macintyre S. Neighbourhood fast food environment and area deprivation-substitution or concentration? Appetite. 2007;49(1):251–254. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2006.11.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  99. 99.↵
    Lieb DC, Snow RE, DeBoer MD. Socioeconomic factors in the development of childhood obesity and diabetes. Clin Sports Med. 2009;28(3):349–378. doi:10.1016/j.csm.2009.02.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  100. 100.↵
    He L, Zhai Y, Engelgau M, et al. Association of children’s eating behaviors with parental education, and teachers’ health awareness, attitudes and behaviors: a national school-based survey in China. Eur J Public Health. 2014;24(6):880–887. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckt177
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  101. 101.↵
    Bunketorp Käll L, Malmgren H, Olsson E, Lindén T, Nilsson M. Effects of a Curricular Physical Activity Intervention on Children’s School Performance, Wellness, and Brain Development. J Sch Health. 2015;85(10):704–713. doi:10.1111/josh.12303
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  102. 102.↵
    Tierney A, Krizman J, Skoe E, Johnston K, Kraus N. High school music classes enhance the neural processing of speech. Front Psychol. 2013;4. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00855.
  103. 103.↵
    Farah MJ, Betancourt L, Shera DM, et al. Environmental stimulation, parental nurturance and cognitive development in humans. Dev Sci. 2008;11(5):793–801. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00688.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  104. 104.↵
    Milteer RM, Ginsburg KR, HEALTH CONCANDMCONPAOFCANDF, et al. The Importance of Play in Promoting Healthy Child Development and Maintaining Strong Parent-Child Bond: Focus on Children in Poverty. Pediatrics. 2012;129(1):e204–e213. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2953
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  105. 105.↵
    Funder DC, Ozer DJ. Evaluating Effect Size in Psychological Research: Sense and Nonsense. Adv Methods Pract Psychol Sci. 2019;2(2):156–168. doi:10.1177/2515245919847202
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  106. 106.↵
    Okbay A, Wu Y, Wang N, et al. Polygenic prediction of educational attainment within and between families from genome-wide association analyses in 3 million individuals. Nat Genet. 2022;54(4):437–449. doi:10.1038/s41588-022-01016-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  107. 107.↵
    Judd N, Sauce B, Wiedenhoeft J, et al. Cognitive and brain development is independently influenced by socioeconomic status and polygenic scores for educational attainment. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2020;117(22):12411–12418. doi:10.1073/pnas.2001228117
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  108. 108.↵
    Chiang M-C, McMahon KL, de Zubicaray GI, et al. Genetics of white matter development: A DTI study of 705 twins and their siblings aged 12 to 29. Neuroimage. 2011;54(3):2308–2317. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.10.015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  109. 109.↵
    Ruijsbroek A, Wijga AH, Kerkhof M, Koppelman GH, Smit HA, Droomers M. The development of socio-economic health differences in childhood: results of the Dutch longitudinal PIAMA birth cohort. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:225. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-11-225
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Posted February 10, 2023.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
Associations between socioeconomic status and white matter microstructure in children: indirect effects via obesity and cognition
Zhaolong Adrian Li, Yuqi Cai, Rita L. Taylor, Sarah A. Eisenstein, Deanna M. Barch, Scott Marek, Tamara Hershey
medRxiv 2023.02.09.23285150; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.09.23285150
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area