Abstract
Traumatic events are ubiquitous exposures that interact with life course events to increase risk of acute psychopathology and alter mental health trajectories. While the majority of persons exposed to trauma experience mild to moderate psychological distress followed by a return to pre-trauma health, many persons exposed to trauma experience substantial distress that lasts for several years. Therefore, in an effort to understand why exposure to trauma can provoke such a range of reactions, we apply a life course approach that considers the complex accumulation and interaction of life experiences that range from social to biological factors, which occur over the life span—from gestation to death and across generations. We present this evidence in three categories: genetics and biology, individual exposures, and community experiences, followed by discussing challenges in existing research and directions for future study.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The terms “traumatic event,” “potentially traumatic event,” and “trauma” have been used in reference to a broad set of adverse experiences outside the “normal” human experience. Exposure to these events is ubiquitous; seven out of ten respondents worldwideFootnote 1 and nine out of ten adults in the USA [1–3] report experiencing one or more lifetime traumas. Traumatic event experiences include individually experienced and mass trauma events. Individual traumas that range from interpersonal violence to accidental injuries are highly prevalent. In addition, approximately 300 natural disasters [4, 5] and 30 armed conflicts [6] are part of the global experience annually. The majority of persons exposed to trauma endure mild to moderate psychological distress followed by a return to pre-trauma health shortly thereafter [7]. Nevertheless, a substantial proportion of persons exposed to traumatic events develop chronic pathological symptoms that may be debilitating and last for several years. We are therefore challenged to understand why exposure to trauma can provoke such a range of reactions.
In this paper, we consider traumatic events in accordance with DSM-IV [8] and DSM-5 [9] as an exposure that involves an actual or threatened harm to a person’s safety, integrity, or life and that are negative in impact and outcome. The characteristics of traumatic events can vary greatly across several dimensions, including type, chronicity, severity, expectedness, and timing. Type of trauma, for example, can range from individual (e.g., automobile accident) to natural disasters. Additional dimensions of traumatic events—including the persistence of the trauma ranging from acute to chronic, exposure severity from mild to severe, expected or unexpected, emotional or physical threat, and whether the trauma occurred during early or later life—can influence the consequences of traumatic events [10–12]. However, the production of psychopathology is unlikely to be explained by the trauma characteristics alone but rather represents a consequence of the complex accumulation and interaction of life experiences that range from social to biological factors that occur over the life span—from gestation to death and across generations [13, 14]. Thus, we use a life course approach as an organizing paradigm through which we review the recent literature on traumatic events and their consequences, using key publications to illustrate how the life course paradigm can inform our understanding of the production of the consequences of traumatic events. By combining a focus on social determinants of health with a conceptual framework for understanding how early- and late-life genetics, biology, behavior, psychology, and environment interact, a life course approach can inform our understanding of how health trajectories are shaped over time and across levels of organization. Instead of focusing on individual risk factors as predictors of psychopathology after trauma, a life course epidemiology points to broad social, economic, and environmental vulnerabilities that are the underlying causes of the unequal distribution of psychopathology across generations and populations [15].
In this review, we consider the interplay between predisposing factors and trauma characteristics that cause psychopathology in civilians. We present this evidence following a life course perspective with focus on three categories: (1) genetics and biology, (2) individual exposures, and (3) community experiences. There is a substantial body of literature that informs our understanding of each of these three types of predisposing factors for the consequences of traumatic events. Recent reviews have comprehensively discussed the literature regarding several aspects of the production of the consequences of traumatic events, including genetic influences [16•], biology [17•], physical and psychological development [18, 19], disasters [20•], and PTSD prevalence [21]. We do not aim here to replicate this work or to provide a systematic review of each section but rather to selectively discuss key papers meant to illustrate how a life course perspective can illuminate a comprehensive understanding of the consequences of traumatic events. Finally, in this paper, we focus on PTSD as the sentinel psychological injury after traumatic events but include other psychopathology as relevant to complement the discussion.
Genetics and Biology
Genetic Determinants
There is little question that particular genetic variants are associated with greater risk of the psychological consequences of traumatic events. Indeed, genetic variation has been shown to explain from 30 to 72 % of the liability for PTSD [17•], underscoring the significance of genetics in understanding the psychological sequelae of trauma. There are at least 17 gene variants documented to be associated with PTSD [17•]. Recognition that no single genetic determinant of the psychopathological consequences is likely to operate in isolation has resulted in a shift from focusing on single candidate genes, to examining polygenic risk scores that simultaneously assess several genes and PTSD [16•]. This research has shown that polygenic risk scores may better explain PTSD risk than any single genetic variant alone [16•, 17•, 22]. While this has proven valuable for informing plausible mechanisms that biologically explain psychogenesis following trauma, it may lead to an oversimplification of our causal thinking, positioning genetics as the central driver of population patterns of psychopathology. Other work has, however, clearly shown that genes interact with environmental and behavioral exposures to produce psychopathology after traumatic events [23].
Gene-Environment Interactions
Biological and social factors independently, cumulatively, and interactively increase psychopathology risk prior to the trauma experience. A life course epidemiology suggests that health trajectories are shaped over one’s life. It is likely, however, that there are sensitive periods during which those exposed to traumatic events may be more vulnerable to eventual psychopathology. For example, those who experience traumatic events during periods of rapid development have a substantial increase in risk of psychopathology throughout life [24–35]. Binder and colleagues [36] therefore, investigated the interaction of early life (i.e., childhood abuse) and genetic (i.e., FKBP5) risk factors in the development of PTSD. Although no direct pathway between FKBP5 and PTSD was found, four FKBP5 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were shown to interact with child abuse severity to predict PTSD [36]. Several studies have since confirmed this interaction between FKBP5 and early life abuse in the development of psychopathology [37–40].
The FKBP5 polymorphism is by no means the only evidence of gene-environment interaction in the development of psychopathology. Decades of research [41, 42] have implicated serotonin receptors in the mediation of PTSD symptoms and modulation of PTSD risk. Thus, investigation of the genetic variation in the promoter region of the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR) and PTSD has documented individual- (e.g., social support) and group-level (e.g., high unemployment neighborhood) exposures that interact with 5-HTTLPR in the development of PTSD [43, 44]. This literature has also led to more recent scholarship proposing a biological mechanism whereby trauma affects changes to the epigenome—DNA modifications that do not change the DNA sequence—that alter the expression of particular genotypes and that these changes may explain interindividual differences in the consequences of traumatic events.
Epigenetics
The burgeoning literature on lifetime experiences that alter the epigenome, and hence gene expression profiles, is one of the more exciting new areas of scholarship in the field of trauma research. Epigenetic changes include DNA methylation (DNAm) and histone modification [45], each of which are characterized by modifications to the regulation of the chromatin, the highly compressed DNA structure, and mediate gene expression in the individual. Epigenetics, therefore, have been leading to the suggestion of biologically plausible mechanisms by which the gene-environment interaction “gets under the skin” to affect the physiologic manifestations of illness [46–48].
Epigenetic changes to the mechanisms involved in the regulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis [46] and immune system [49] have been shown among individuals with PTSD. DNAm affects the accessibility of the DNA sequence for transcription into messenger RNA and its products [50]. In this manner, early life experiences mark the epigenome, which alter gene expression throughout the life course. Klengel and colleagues [51••] showed that a childhood trauma activates glucocorticoid receptors in the HPA-axis that differentially induce DNAm changes in persons with a particular FKBP5 polymorphism [51••]. Moreover, this increase in DNAm reduced neurogenesis, particularly in the right hippocampus [51••], which is associated with depression and PTSD [27, 52, 53]. Although this finding leaves a “black box” association between hippocampal volume and psychopathology, this study suggested that (i) trauma exposure exerts the maximal effect only in childhood (i.e., similar effects were not shown for later life trauma exposure), (ii) creates long-lasting changes in gene function, and (iii) affects biological development and mental illness through the life course. Moreover, recent epigenetic studies have extended the influence of environmental exposures from an individual directly exposed, to their descendants, and across generations [54–57].
Recent work suggests that epigenetic mechanisms are heritable and modifiable processes fundamental to the growth and sustainment of human life [45]. Epigenetic heritability, also called transgenerational inheritance, refers to alterations to the epigenome that are passed from one generation to another. While animal models have demonstrated that epigenetic variation acquired during the intrauterine period affects disease risk in adulthood [56, 58], recent studies have suggested that these alterations can influence several generations [54]. For example, Yao and colleagues [54] observed multigenerational inheritance, whereby great-grandchildren of gestating female rats exposed to stress birthed pups of decreased weight and altered developmental behaviors [54], suggesting that individual trauma experience may be interacting with stress experiences across several generations to cause psychopathology.
In humans, differentiating the genetic and environmental origins of changes to the epigenome has been less clear. For example, children of women with PTSD are more likely to experience trauma than children of women without PTSD [55]. Thus, the mother’s traumatic event could both cause her epigenetic changes and increase risk of a traumatic event that alters the child’s epigenome—independent of the mother transmitting her epigenome to her child. Although the confirmation of transgenerational inheritance in humans will encounter substantial methodological challenges, recent work showing the effect of maternal smoking in DNAm [59, 60] provides early evidence in this regard.
Individual Exposures
The psychological consequences of traumatic event experiences represent the culmination of an individual’s biological, genetic, and life experiences prior to, during, and after a traumatic event. In this model, traumatic experiences never act in isolation. Rather, external stimuli affect biology and genetics to increase risk of psychopathology. In this section, we will examine sensitive times during development when trauma may exert maximum influence on life course health trajectories. Second, we will discuss the potential for chains of risk that arise from the correlation between experiences. Third, we will discuss the role of event characteristics in the development of psychopathology. Finally, we will discuss the contribution of postevent experiences in the risk and course of psychopathology.
Frequency Versus Timing of Events
In the USA, 13 % of children will experience a confirmed case of abuse or neglect by age 18 [61], and half will experience adversity that may include the following: parental death (3–7 %), family violence (7–8 %), parental substance abuse (11 %), and parental criminality (26 %) [62, 63]. The consequences of childhood adversity affect mental health well into adulthood. Indeed, experiencing one or more instances of adversity contributes to 80 % of childhood/adolescent suicide attempts [64], 63 % of drug dependence [65], and 54 % of depression [66]. Furthermore, evidence from several studies consistently demonstrates that a dose-response relationship exists whereby each additional event experienced in childhood increases the risk of suicidal behaviors [64], substance use [67, 68], and mental illness [66]. Based on this evidence, two models are proposed to explain this dose-response relationship between number of events and mental illness. First, there is evidence that sensitive stages of development exist when the effects of certain experiences, particularly traumatic events, are greater than during other periods [69]. Under this model, the event’s timing during development drives both the acute response and alters biological processes that affect long-term mental health trajectories. Second, the “chains of risk” hypothesis emphasizes the critical role that correlation between trauma and adversity plays in shaping life course mental health trajectories.
Sensitive Time Periods
The sensitive time period model is grounded in an appreciation of developmental periods when events affect brain development and psychopathology differentially than other periods. Research that supports this model shows that the age sexual abuse is experienced during childhood differentially predicts regional changes in brain development. For example, a reduction in hippocampal volume is observed among those who experience sexual abuse during ages 3–5, while a reduction is observed in the corpus callosum and frontal cortex during ages 9–10 and 14–16, respectively [31]. Moreover, these differential changes in brain development paralleled differences in psychopathology, showing that depression and PTSD symptoms are more likely among those who experience abuse respectively during ages 3–5 and 9–10 [31]. Alternatively, the correlation between events, as opposed to the timing of events, may explain the dose-response relationship between trauma and mental illness risk throughout the life course.
Chains of Risk
Traumatic events happen repeatedly to the same people [2, 70, 71]. Several nationally representative surveys show that the majority of children and youth ages 2 to 17 years who report one or more traumas report experiencing multiple events [71, 72], averaging three separate types of events [70, 73, 74]. This is not unique to children; we found that 62 % of adults in urban Detroit experience three or more traumas in their lifetime (e.g., assaultive violence, serious motor vehicle crash, sudden unexpected death of a close friend or relative), while one in five experience eight or more traumas [2]. There are two primary pathways to explain this multiplicity of events. First, particular environments (e.g., neighborhoods) increase the likelihood of exposure to trauma and adversity. Importantly, this effect is more specific than urban versus rural [75] but particular to neighborhoods and high-risk intra-urban areas [76–78]. Second, an initial trauma initiates a chain of risk whereby a cascade of adversity may follow [79, 80]. The second pathway will be the focus of this section.
Exposures can be either correlated or uncorrelated based on the probability of concurrent or sequentially associated occurrences of adverse experiences. Uncorrelated exposures, sometimes referred to as the single-hit model [81], are those that have effects on the outcome irrespective of a later exposure. This model is more akin to the evidence above showing sensitive time-windows for susceptibility for outcomes. However, many traumatic experiences are correlated exposures that can initiate a chain of risk throughout life. For example, while child abuse directly increases risk of psychopathology in the victim, victims of childhood trauma are substantially more likely to experience adulthood trauma [79, 80], suggesting that this cycle of trauma may begin early and be perpetuated throughout the life course. Moreover, there is strong evidence that individuals experiencing interpersonal traumas at any age have a twofold to threefold higher risk of experiencing a second trauma [74]. For example, Daigle et al. [82] reported that nearly one in four college rape victims report multiple instances of victimization in the past year, while nearly half (45 %) of all rape reported in this sample occurred among the 3 % of women who reported three or more sexual victimizations [82]. Thus, an incident trauma can initiate a long-term psychological chain of risk whereby an event increases risk of developing psychopathology, which increases risk of victimization.
Trauma Characteristics
In the previous sections, we considered the role of individual factors, other than the trauma itself, in the production of psychopathology. However, in addition, degree of trauma severity has been observed to be consistently associated with development of disorders. Distance from event is one marker for severity of exposure. In the aftermath of the World Trade Center (WTC) (9/11) attacks, for example, we found that 7.5 % of civilian survey respondents met criteria for PTSD in the 2–3 months after the attack [83]. The prevalence of PTSD, however, was substantially different based on location of residence prior to attack; respondents living south of Canal Street (less than 1 mi from the WTC) were three times more likely to meet PTSD criteria than those who lived between Canal Street and 110th Street (1 to 7 mi from the WTC). Moreover, in the 2–3 years following the attack, we found that 15 % of civilian survivors who worked in the towers met criteria for PTSD [84], compared to 12 % who lived in the area south of Canal Street [85]. Other markers of trauma severity, associated with development of psychopathology, include injury [84, 86–88], intentionality [21], and witnessing horror and death [84].
Secondary Traumas
Postexposure factors, also called secondary traumas, encompass a wide range of potentially traumatic events that may occur in conjunction with the primary trauma, including physical or sexual assault, loss of someone close, or a serious accident [89–92]. Consistent evidence [87, 89, 90, 93, 94] suggests that the natural disaster itself is often a lesser cause of psychopathology than the secondary traumas accompanying the disaster. For example, in a worldwide sample, examination of the effects of postexposure factors following a natural disaster found that the association between the disaster itself and onset mental illness became insignificant in the presence of these secondary traumas [92]. Secondary traumas are examples of the risk cascades that are initiated by an incident trauma under the chains of risk model.
Community-Level Factors
Community-level factors are associated with the consequences of traumatic events over and above the role of individual-level factors. In the aftermath of mass trauma, disruption to a social environment frequently occurs in conjunction with the destruction of physical structures [95]. Community social cohesion, defined as willingness between individuals to cooperate with their community in the service of common values [76, 78], has been documented to affect mental health above and beyond individual-level characteristics [95–97]. As such, after traumatic events, community social cohesion is capable of both exacerbating mental illness risk in the presence of low social cohesion and encouraging recovery in communities characterized by high social cohesion [96]. For example, a socially cohesive community may be better positioned to mobilize posttrauma efforts to identify and assist those in need, disseminate information across the community, and advocate for outside aid [98, 99]. Conversely, displacement after trauma, which interferes with existing community social cohesion, has been associated with the development of psychopathology [95, 100].
These social factors do not act alone. Social factors modify the relationship between individual factors, trauma experiences, and psychopathology. For example, employing data from the 2004 Florida Hurricane Study, we showed that county crime rate modified the association between serotonin transporter genotype and risk of PTSD in adults [44], suggesting that these social factors act together with genetic/biological factors and individual characteristics to produce psychopathology in the presence of trauma. Therefore, explanation of trauma-related psychopathology involves interplay among genetics and biology, individual factors, and social factors, i.e., the study of the consequences of trauma must focus on the pre-determinants of those consequences over the life course.
Challenges in Existing Research, Directions for Future Research
A life course perspective demands much from data. Centrally, time represents the most substantial challenge to assessing accurate lifetime trauma data. For example, since childhood traumatic event experiences significantly affect life course mental illness risk [19], the investigation of later life psychopathology requires the accurate measurement of early life trauma. However, our typical trauma assessment armamentarium, principally retrospective self-report and administrative records, has significant limitations. Nearly a third of people with documented cases of early life abuse do not report these incidents when surveyed as adults [101] and three times as many children are abused as reported to federal agencies in the USA [102]. In addition, minor events are commonly forgotten [103], memories can be manipulated [104, 105], and administrative systems restrict identified access to these data for research.
Second, even if we could assume prefect recall and unlimited access to data, we require methods amply sensitive to identify influential experiences yet granular enough to investigate factors across several levels of exposure. For example, in this paper alone, we discussed the consequences of trauma using examples from six different types of events that ranged across levels (i.e., individual [sexual assault, accidental injuries, child abuse] to mass trauma [natural disasters, terrorist attacks, armed conflicts]), time (i.e., childhood, adolescence, and later life), and severity (i.e., adversity [parental incarceration or death] to traumatic). The complexities inherent in these data require comprehensive measures that assess trauma characteristics specific to the question of interest but robust enough for secondary analysis to assess the individual and cumulative effects of particular traumatic events.
Third, a life course epidemiology requires large prospective studies to investigate the complex accumulation and interaction of life experiences that range across levels and over time. To date, life course epidemiology has employed numerous small to moderately sized cohort studies to triangulate effects. The integration of findings across numerous studies, even employing analytical tools to account for methodological differences among studies (e.g., random-effects meta analyses [106]), remains beholden to the limitations of individual studies. Large-scale longitudinal studies such as, for example, the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) [107] are one solution to this challenge. The ALSPAC is a large prospective study that enrolled in 1991 and has since followed more than 13,000 pregnant women and their children who resided in the South West of England. While these data have greatly increased our understanding of life course health trajectories, the cohort is predominantly white (97.8 %), affluent (79 % home owners), and represents a sample of residents from one area of England [107]. Thus, additional life course epidemiologic studies in more diverse populations (e.g., USA) are necessary to advance understanding of social and biological processes that alter life course health trajectories. While studies such as ALSPAC represent monumental efforts and costs, the interplay between individuals and societies over time is required to advance the field. In the absence of large prospective studies, best practices need to integrate data across several systems (e.g., electronic medical records, historical events) and methods (e.g., self-report, objective records) to triangulate trauma experiences throughout the life course.
The field also faces analytical challenges as it grapples with influences over multiple levels. Mervyn Susser wrote that “(i)f our disciple (epidemiology) is to rise to meet expectations, we shall have to command both the genies of molecules at the micro level, and of social forces at the macrolevel” [108]. Unfortunately, most extant analytical methods are not able to deal with the added complexity recent theoretical models have introduced, principally risk factors across levels and over time. A recent literature has introduced latent growth mixture models (LGMM) [see 109] and multilevel regression into trauma epidemiology to respectively examine symptomology over time and across levels. However, regression-based methods such as these assume that there is no interaction between individual units [110]. Not only is this assumption unrealistic but also the interaction between units that give rise to population-level phenomenon are of great interest to epidemiology. Thus, we have called for the adoption of complex systems approaches, including agent-based models, to examine complex disease etiologies in the study of epidemiology [111–113]. The interplay between levels of organization over time present in trauma research suggests that these questions are well suited for analysis with complex systems approaches.
Conclusions
Traumatic events are ubiquitous exposures that cause significant acute psychopathology and alter life course mental health trajectories. It is likely that we are currently underestimating the contribution of traumatic events to population health. A life course approach provides an important organizing principle to understand the interplay between traumatic events and the development of psychopathology. Future research that considers the complexity of interactions across levels of organization and over time is necessary to understand the full contribution of trauma to mental illness burden in the USA and worldwide, with an aspiration toward mitigating the consequences of these events.
Notes
Personal communication with Corina Benjet based on the World Mental Health Survey Initiative, a worldwide survey assessing 68,894 adults in 24 countries.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Kilpatrick DG, Resnick HS, Milanak ME, Miller MW, Keyes KM, Friedman MJ. National estimates of exposure to traumatic events and PTSD prevalence using DSM‐IV and DSM‐5 criteria. J Trauma Stress. 2013;26(5):537–47.
Keyes KM, McLaughlin KA, Demmer RT, Cerdá M, Koenen KC, Uddin M, et al. Potentially traumatic events and the risk of six physical health conditions in a population-based sample. Depress Anxiety. 2013;30(5):451–60.
Scott KM, Koenen KC, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Alonso J, Angermeyer MC, Benjet C, et al. Associations between lifetime traumatic events and subsequent chronic physical conditions: a cross-national, cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e80573.
Guha-Sapir D, Hoyois P, Below R. Annual disaster statistical review 2013: the numbers and trends. Brussels: Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED); 2014.
Jennings S. Time’s bitter flood: trends in the number of reported natural disasters. Oxfam Policy Pract Clim Chang Resilience. 2011;7(1):115–47.
Themnér L, Wallensteen P. Armed conflicts, 1946–2013. J Peace Res. 2014;51(4):541–54.
Littleton H, Axsom D, Grills-Taquechel AE. Longitudinal evaluation of the relationship between maladaptive trauma coping and distress: examination following the mass shooting at Virginia Tech. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2011;24(3):273–90. doi:10.1080/10615806.2010.500722.
(APA) APA. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: text revision D. 2000.
Association AP. DSM 5. American Psychiatric Association; 2013.
McEwen BS. Protection and damage from acute and chronic stress: allostasis and allostatic overload and relevance to the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1032(1):1–7.
Brewin CR, Andrews B, Valentine JD. Meta-analysis of risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in trauma-exposed adults. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000;68(5):748.
Keyes KM, Hatzenbuehler ML, Hasin DS. Stressful life experiences, alcohol consumption, and alcohol use disorders: the epidemiologic evidence for four main types of stressors. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011;218(1):1–17. doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2236-1.
Koenen KC, Rudenstine S, Susser E, Galea S. A life course approach to mental disorders. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2014.
Kuh D, Ben-Shlomo Y, Lynch J, Hallqvist J, Power C. Life course epidemiology. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003;57(10):778–83.
Yehuda R, McFarlane AC. Conflict between current knowledge about posttraumatic stress disorder and its original conceptual basis. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152(12):1705–13.
Cornelis MC, Nugent NR, Amstadter AB, Koenen KC. Genetics of post-traumatic stress disorder: review and recommendations for genome-wide association studies. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010;12(4):313–26. doi:10.1007/s11920-010-0126-6. This review makes a case for genome wide association studies on the consequences of trauma.
Pitman RK, Rasmusson AM, Koenen KC, Shin LM, Orr SP, Gilbertson MW, et al. Biological studies of post-traumatic stress disorder. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13(11):769–87. This qualitiative review describes the extant evidence base about biological and genetic components of posttraumatic stress disorder.
Buckingham ET, Daniolos P. Longitudinal outcomes for victims of child abuse. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2013;15(2):342. doi:10.1007/s11920-012-0342-3.
Fairbank JA, Fairbank DW. Epidemiology of child traumatic stress. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2009;11:289–95.
Goldmann E, Galea S. Mental health consequences of disasters. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35:169–83. This qualitative review outlines existing literature with respect to the psychological sequela of disasters.
Santiago PN, Ursano RJ, Gray CL, Pynoos RS, Spiegel D, Lewis-Fernandez R, et al. A systematic review of PTSD prevalence and trajectories in DSM-5 defined trauma exposed populations: intentional and non-intentional traumatic events. PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e59236.
Solovieff N, Roberts AL, Ratanatharathorn A, Haloosim M, De Vivo I, King AP, et al. Genetic association analysis of 300 genes identifies a risk haplotype in SLC18A2 for post-traumatic stress disorder in two independent samples. Neuropsychopharmacol Off Publ Am Coll Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014.
Caspi A, Moffitt TE. Gene-environment interactions in psychiatry: joining forces with neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7(7):583–90. doi:10.1038/nrn1925.
Ho NF, Hooker JM, Sahay A, Holt DJ, Roffman JL. In vivo imaging of adult human hippocampal neurogenesis: progress, pitfalls and promise. Mol Psychiatry. 2013;18(4):404–16. doi:10.1038/mp.2013.8.
DeCarolis NA, Eisch AJ. Hippocampal neurogenesis as a target for the treatment of mental illness: a critical evaluation. Neuropharmacology. 2010;58(6):884–93. doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2009.12.013.
Teicher MH, Anderson CM, Polcari A. Childhood maltreatment is associated with reduced volume in the hippocampal subfields CA3, dentate gyrus, and subiculum. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109(9):E563–72.
Frodl T, Reinhold E, Koutsouleris N, Reiser M, Meisenzahl EM. Interaction of childhood stress with hippocampus and prefrontal cortex volume reduction in major depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2010;44(13):799–807.
Dannlowski U, Stuhrmann A, Beutelmann V, Zwanzger P, Lenzen T, Grotegerd D, et al. Limbic scars: long-term consequences of childhood maltreatment revealed by functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging. Biol Psychiatry. 2012;71(4):286–93.
Edmiston EE, Wang F, Mazure CM, Guiney J, Sinha R, Mayes LC, et al. Corticostriatal-limbic gray matter morphology in adolescents with self-reported exposure to childhood maltreatment. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(12):1069–77.
Tomoda A, Polcari A, Anderson CM, Teicher MH. Reduced visual cortex gray matter volume and thickness in young adults who witnessed domestic violence during childhood. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52528.
Andersen S, Tomada A, Vincow E, Valente E, Polcari A, Teicher M. Preliminary evidence for sensitive periods in the effect of childhood sexual abuse on regional brain development. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2008;20(3):292–301.
Rao H, Betancourt L, Giannetta JM, Brodsky NL, Korczykowski M, Avants BB, et al. Early parental care is important for hippocampal maturation: evidence from brain morphology in humans. Neuroimage. 2010;49(1):1144–50.
Sugaya L, Hasin DS, Olfson M, Lin K-H, Grant BF, Blanco C. Child physical abuse and adult mental health: a national study. J Trauma Stress. 2012;25(4):384–92. doi:10.1002/jts.21719.
Angst J, Gamma A, Rössler W, Ajdacic V, Klein DN. Childhood adversity and chronicity of mood disorders. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2011;261(1):21–7.
Teicher MH, Samson JA, Polcari A, Andersen SL. Length of time between onset of childhood sexual abuse and emergence of depression in a young adult sample: a retrospective clinical report. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70(5):684–91.
Binder EB, Bradley RG, Liu W, Epstein MP, Deveau TC, Mercer KB, et al. Association of FKBP5 polymorphisms and childhood abuse with risk of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in adults. JAMA. 2008;299(11):1291–305.
Xie P, Kranzler HR, Poling J, Stein MB, Anton RF, Farrer LA, et al. Interaction of FKBP5 with childhood adversity on risk for post-traumatic stress disorder. Neuropsychopharmacol Off Publ Am Coll Neuropsychopharmacol. 2010;35(8):1684–92.
Appel K, Schwahn C, Mahler J, Schulz A, Spitzer C, Fenske K, et al. Moderation of adult depression by a polymorphism in the FKBP5 gene and childhood physical abuse in the general population. Neuropsychopharmacol Off Publ Am Coll Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;36(10):1982–91.
Bevilacqua L, Carli V, Sarchiapone M, George DK, Goldman D, Roy A, et al. Interaction between FKBP5 and childhood trauma and risk of aggressive behavior. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2012;69(1):62–70.
Collip D, Myin-Germeys I, Wichers M, Jacobs N, Derom C, Thiery E, et al. FKBP5 as a possible moderator of the psychosis-inducing effects of childhood trauma. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;202(4):261–8.
Southwick SM, Krystal JH, Bremner JD, Morgan C, Nicolaou AL, Nagy LM, et al. Noradrenergic and serotonergic function in posttraumatic stress disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1997;54(8):749–58.
Lee HJ, Lee MS, Kang RH, Kim H, Kim SD, Kee BS, et al. Influence of the serotonin transporter promoter gene polymorphism on susceptibility to posttraumatic stress disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2005;21(3):135–9.
Kilpatrick D, Koenen K, Ruggiero K, Acierno R, Galea S, Resnick H, et al. The serotonin transporter genotype and social support and moderation of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression in hurricane-exposed adults. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(11):1693–9.
Koenen KC, Aiello AE, Bakshis E, Amstadter AB, Ruggiero KJ, Acierno R, et al. Modification of the association between serotonin transporter genotype and risk of posttraumatic stress disorder in adults by county-level social environment. Am J Epidemiol. 2009:kwn397.
Kim J, Samaranayake M, Pradhan S. Epigenetic mechanisms in mammals. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2009;66(4):596–612.
McGowan PO, Sasaki A, D’Alessio AC, Dymov S, Labonté B, Szyf M, et al. Epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor in human brain associates with childhood abuse. Nat Neurosci. 2009;12(3):342–8.
Essex MJ, Thomas Boyce W, Hertzman C, Lam LL, Armstrong JM, Neumann S, et al. Epigenetic vestiges of early developmental adversity: childhood stress exposure and DNA methylation in adolescence. Child Dev. 2013;84(1):58–75.
Beach SR, Brody GH, Todorov AA, Gunter TD, Philibert RA. Methylation at SLC6A4 is linked to family history of child abuse: an examination of the Iowa Adoptee sample. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2010;153(2):710–3.
Uddin M, Aiello AE, Wildman DE, Koenen KC, Pawelec G, De los Santos R, et al. Epigenetic and immune function profiles associated with posttraumatic stress disorder. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(20):9470–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.0910794107.
Levenson JM, Sweatt JD. Epigenetic mechanisms in memory formation. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005;6(2):108–18.
Klengel T, Mehta D, Anacker C, Rex-Haffner M, Pruessner JC, Pariante CM, et al. Allele-specific FKBP5 DNA demethylation mediates gene-childhood trauma interactions. Nat Neurosci. 2013;16(1):33–41. This manuscript provides a biologically plausible mechanism by which environment affects epigenetic changes that translate into developmental differences that explain mental illness.
Opel N, Redlich R, Zwanzger P, Grotegerd D, Arolt V, Heindel W, et al. Hippocampal atrophy in major depression: a function of childhood maltreatment rather than diagnosis & quest. Neuropsychopharmacol Off Publ Am Coll Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014;39(12):2723–31.
Frodl T, O’Keane V. How does the brain deal with cumulative stress? A review with focus on developmental stress, HPA axis function and hippocampal structure in humans. Neurobiol Dis. 2013;52:24–37.
Yao Y, Robinson AM, Zucchi FC, Robbins JC, Babenko O, Kovalchuk O, et al. Ancestral exposure to stress epigenetically programs preterm birth risk and adverse maternal and newborn outcomes. BMC Med. 2014;12(1):121.
Roberts AL, Galea S, Austin SB, Cerda M, Wright RJ, Rich-Edwards JW, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder across two generations: concordance and mechanisms in a population-based sample. Biol Psychiatry. 2012;72(6):505–11.
Bale TL. Sex differences in prenatal epigenetic programing of stress pathways. Stress. 2011;14(4):348–56.
<ASPP Talking Points_17 Jun 11.pdf>.
Gluckman PD, Beedle AS. Match fitness: development, evolution, and behavior: comment on Frankenhuis and Del Giudice (2012). 2012.
Joubert BR, Håberg SE, Nilsen RM, Wang X, Vollset SE, Murphy SK, et al. 450K epigenome-wide scan identifies differential DNA methylation in newborns related to maternal smoking during pregnancy. Environ Health Perspect. 2012;120(10):1425.
Zeilinger S, Kühnel B, Klopp N, Baurecht H, Kleinschmidt A, Gieger C, et al. Tobacco smoking leads to extensive genome-wide changes in DNA methylation. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e63812.
Wildeman C, Emanuel N, Leventhal JM, Putnam-Hornstein E, Waldfogel J, Lee H. The prevalence of confirmed maltreatment among US children, 2004 to 2011. JAMA Pediatr. 2014.
McLaughlin KA, Greif Green J, Gruber MJ, Sampson NA, Zaslavsky AM, Kessler RC. Childhood adversities and first onset of psychiatric disorders in a national sample of US adolescents. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2012;69(11):1151–60. doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.2277.
Bethell CD, Newacheck P, Hawes E, Halfon N. Adverse childhood experiences: assessing the impact on health and school engagement and the mitigating role of resilience. Health Aff. 2014;33(12):2106–15.
Dube SR, Anda RF, Felitti VJ, Chapman DP, Williamson DF, Giles WH. Childhood abuse, household dysfunction, and the risk of attempted suicide throughout the life span: findings from the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study. JAMA. 2001;286(24):3089–96.
Dube SR, Felitti VJ, Dong M, Chapman DP, Giles WH, Anda RF. Childhood abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction and the risk of illicit drug use: the adverse childhood experiences study. Pediatrics. 2003;111(3):564–72.
Chapman DP, Whitfield CL, Felitti VJ, Dube SR, Edwards VJ, Anda RF. Adverse childhood experiences and the risk of depressive disorders in adulthood. J Affect Disord. 2004;82(2):217–25. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2003.12.013.
Dube SR, Miller JW, Brown DW, Giles WH, Felitti VJ, Dong M, et al. Adverse childhood experiences and the association with ever using alcohol and initiating alcohol use during adolescence. J Adolesc Health Off Publ Soc Adolesc Med. 2006;38(4):444.e1–10. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.06.006.
Anda RF, Brown DW, Felitti VJ, Dube SR, Giles WH. Adverse childhood experiences and prescription drug use in a cohort study of adult HMO patients. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:198. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-198.
Ben-Shlomo Y, Kuh D. A life course approach to chronic disease epidemiology: conceptual models, empirical challenges and interdisciplinary perspectives. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31(2):285–93.
Finkelhor D, Ormrod RK, Turner HA. Polyvictimization and trauma in a national longitudinal cohort. Dev Psychopathol. 2007;19(1):149–66. doi:10.1017/s0954579407070083.
Green JG, McLaughlin KA, Berglund PA, Gruber MJ, Sampson NA, Zaslavsky AM, et al. Childhood adversities and adult psychiatric disorders in the national comorbidity survey replication I: associations with first onset of DSM-IV disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(2):113–23. doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.186.
McLaughlin KA, Conron KJ, Koenen KC, Gilman SE. Childhood adversity, adult stressful life events, and risk of past-year psychiatric disorder: a test of the stress sensitization hypothesis in a population-based sample of adults. Psychol Med. 2010;40(10):1647–58.
Finkelhor D, Ormrod RK, Turner HA. Re-victimization patterns in a national longitudinal sample of children and youth. Child Abuse Negl. 2007;31(5):479–502. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.03.012.
Finkelhor D, Ormrod RK, Turner HA. Poly-victimization: a neglected component in child victimization. Child Abuse Negl. 2007;31(1):7–26. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.06.008.
McCall-Hosenfeld JS, Mukherjee S, Lehman EB. The prevalence and correlates of lifetime psychiatric disorders and trauma exposures in urban and rural settings: results from the national comorbidity survey replication (NCS-R). PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e112416.
Sampson RJ. The neighborhood context of well-being. Perspect Biol Med. 2003;46(3):S53–64.
Sampson RJ. Disparity and diversity in the contemporary city: social (dis)order revisited. Br J Sociol. 2009;60(1):1–31. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2009.01211.x. discussion 3-8.
Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997;277(5328):918–24.
Arata CM. Child sexual abuse and sexual revictimization. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2002;9(2):135–64.
Kimerling R, Alvarez J, Pavao J, Kaminski A, Baumrind N. Epidemiology and consequences of women’s revictimization. Women’s Health Issues Off Publ Jacobs Inst Women’s Health. 2007;17(2):101–6. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2006.12.002.
Walter S, Holford T. Additive, multiplicative, and other models for disease risks. Am J Epidemiol. 1978;108(5):341–6.
Daigle LE, Fisher BS, Cullen FT. The violent and sexual victimization of college women is repeat victimization a problem? J Interpers Violence. 2008;23(9):1296–313.
Galea S, Ahern J, Resnick H, Kilpatrick D, Bucuvalas M, Gold J, et al. Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(13):982–7. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa013404.
DiGrande L, Neria Y, Brackbill RM, Pulliam P, Galea S. Long-term posttraumatic stress symptoms among 3,271 civilian survivors of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;173(3):271–81.
DiGrande L, Perrin MA, Thorpe LE, Thalji L, Murphy J, Wu D, et al. Posttraumatic stress symptoms, PTSD, and risk factors among lower Manhattan residents 2–3 years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. J Trauma Stress. 2008;21(3):264–73.
Miguel-Tobal JJ, Vindel AC, Iruarrizaga I, Ordi HG, Galea S. Psychopathological repercussions of the March 11 terrorist attacks in Madrid. Colegio Oficial de Psicologos Spain, Spain. 2005. http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=psyc4&NEWS=N&AN=2006-11127-009. Accessed American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-IV-TR. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. 9.
Cerdá M, Paczkowski M, Galea S, Nemethy K, Péan C, Desvarieux M. Psychopathology in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake: a population-based study of posttraumatic stress disorder and major depression. Depress Anxiety. 2013;30(5):413–24.
Norris FH, Sherrieb K, Galea S. Prevalence and consequences of disaster-related illness and injury from Hurricane Ike. Rehabil Psychol. 2010;55(3):221–30. doi:10.1037/a0020195.
Galea S, Tracy M, Norris F, Coffey SF. Financial and social circumstances and the incidence and course of PTSD in Mississippi during the first two years after Hurricane Katrina. J Trauma Stress. 2008;21(4):357–68.
Galea S, Brewin CR, Gruber MJ, Jones RT, King DW, King LA, et al. Exposure to hurricane-related stressors and mental illness after Hurricane Katrina. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(12):1427–34. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.64.12.1427.
Person C, Tracy M, Galea S. Risk factors for depression after a disaster. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2006;194(9):659–66. doi:10.1097/01.nmd.0000235758.24586.b7.
Kessler RC, McLaughlin K, Koenen KC, Petukhova M, Hill E. The importance of secondary trauma exposure for post-disaster mental disorder. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2012;21(01):35–45.
McLaughlin KA, Berglund P, Gruber MJ, Kessler RC, Sampson NA, Zaslavsky AM. Recovery from PTSD following hurricane Katrina. Depress Anxiety. 2011;28(6):439–46.
Hobfoll SE, Canetti-Nisim D, Johnson RJ, Palmieri PA, Varley JD, Galea S. The association of exposure, risk, and resiliency factors with PTSD among Jews and Arabs exposed to repeated acts of terrorism in Israel. J Trauma Stress. 2008;21(1):9–21. doi:10.1002/jts.20307.
Le F, Tracy M, Norris FH, Galea S. Displacement, county social cohesion, and depression after a large-scale traumatic event. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2013;48(11):1729–41. doi:10.1007/s00127-013-0698-7.
Johns LE, Aiello AE, Cheng C, Galea S, Koenen KC, Uddin M. Neighborhood social cohesion and posttraumatic stress disorder in a community-based sample: findings from the Detroit Neighborhood Health Study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2012;47(12):1899–906.
Mair CF, Roux AVD, Galea S. Are neighborhood characteristics associated with depressive symptoms? A critical review. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008:jech. 2007.066605.
Kawachi I, Subramanian S. Measuring and modeling the social and geographic context of trauma: a multilevel modeling approach. J Trauma Stress. 2006;19(2):195–203.
Norris FH, Stevens SP, Pfefferbaum B, Wyche KF, Pfefferbaum RL. Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. Am J Community Psychol. 2008;41(1–2):127–50.
Fussell E, Lowe SR. The impact of housing displacement on the mental health of low-income parents after Hurricane Katrina. Soc Sci Med. 2014;113:137–44.
Hardt J, Rutter M. Validity of adult retrospective reports of adverse childhood experiences: review of the evidence. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(2):260–73.
Sedlak AJ, Mettenburg J, Basena M, Petta I, McPherson K, Greene A, et al. Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-4): Report to Congress, Executive Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Adiminstration for Children and Families; 2010.
Roberts RO, Bergstralh EJ, Schmidt L, Jacobsen SJ. Comparison of self-reported and medical record health care utilization measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49(9):989–95.
Loftus EF, Palmer JC. Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav. 1974;13(5):585–9.
Goff LM, Roediger HL. Imagination inflation for action events: repeated imaginings lead to illusory recollections. Mem Cogn. 1998;26(1):20–33.
Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
Fraser A, Macdonald-Wallis C, Tilling K, Boyd A, Golding J, Smith GD, et al. Cohort profile: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: ALSPAC mothers cohort. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(1):97–110.
Susser M. Does risk factor epidemiology put epidemiology at risk? Peering into the future. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52(10):608–11.
Bonanno GA. Loss, trauma, and human resilience: have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? Am Psychol. 2004;59(1):20–8. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.20.
Rubin DB. Statistics and causal inference: comment: which ifs have causal answers. J Am Stat Assoc. 1986;81(396):961–2.
Galea S, Riddle M, Kaplan GA. Causal thinking and complex system approaches in epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39(1):97–106.
Galea S, Hall C, Kaplan GA. Social epidemiology and complex system dynamic modelling as applied to health behaviour and drug use research. Int J Drug Policy. 2009;20(3):209–16.
Marshall BD, Galea S. Formalizing the role of agent-based modeling in causal inference and epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2014:kwu274.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by research grants from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institute of Health (grant number T32DA031099). The sponsoring agency had no further role in the study design and analysis, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
ᅟ
Conflict of Interest
David S. Fink and Sandro Galea declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Disaster Psychiatry: Trauma, PTSD, and Related Disorders
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fink, D.S., Galea, S. Life Course Epidemiology of Trauma and Related Psychopathology in Civilian Populations. Curr Psychiatry Rep 17, 31 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-015-0566-0
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-015-0566-0