Key result
Black adults exhibit ~112% higher odds of a cardiovascular risk profile vs White adults.
Why the study?
The study sought to expand implications of physiological weathering by applying latent profile analysis to stress biomarkers to address limitations of traditional allostatic load calculations.
Cross-Sectional (n=4,047)
Effect estimate: OR 2.12 (95% CI 1.39-3.27)
p-value: p=0.001
Latent profile analysis of stress biomarkers identified four distinct physiological risk profiles that vary significantly by race, age, and gender, highlighting socioeconomic differences in allostatic load and cardiovascular risk.
Racial disparities in risk profiles may guide equitable prevention; leaves open causal pathways and requires longitudinal validation before practice change.
Purpose. The current study sought to expand implications of physiological weathering through the application of latent profile analysis to stress biomarkers to address limitations of traditional allostatic load calculations. Methods. Latent profile analysis was applied biomarkers used in traditional allostatic load metrics to identify physiological risk profiles in the 2007-20010 National Health and Nutritional and Examination Survey. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the probability of risk profiles by race/ethnicity, age, gender, and poverty income ratio (PIR). Mean allostatic load score was assessed across each risk profile. Results. Latent profile analysis identified four distinct profiles labeled low risk, inflammatory risk, cardiovascular risk, and hypertension risk. Race, age, and gender significantly increased odds of exhibiting a risk profile. Compared to Whites, Hispanics had significant higher odds of inflammatory (OR=1.43, 95% CI [1.06-1.92]) and cardiovascular risk profiles (OR=1.63, 95% CI [1.09-2.43]) while Blacks had higher odds of inflammatory (OR=1.76 95% CI [1.25-2.47]), cardiovascular (OR=2.12, 95% CI, [1.39-3.27]) and hypertension risk profiles (OR= 1.78, 95% CI [1.21-2.59]). Females held significant greater odds of all risk categories except hypertension in which they held the lowest odds (OR= .19, 95% CI [.14-.25]). Mean allostatic load scores were highest in the inflammatory (M=3.99, SD=1.66) and cardiovascular risk profiles (M=4.4, SD=1.84). Conclusions. Employing latent profile analysis may expand traditional allostatic load methodology by identifying physiological risk patterns among those who experience allostatic load early in life. This may be useful for examining how cultural specific interventions may reduce cardiovascular risk among those exhibiting physiological risk profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johnson et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional in Physiological risk profiles / Allostatic load (n=4,047). Race/Ethnicity (Black and Hispanic) vs. White participants was evaluated on Odds of cardiovascular risk profile (Black vs White) (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.39-3.27, p=0.001). Compared to White adults, Black adults had significantly higher odds of exhibiting a cardiovascular risk profile (OR 2.12) and an inflammatory risk profile (OR 1.76).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: