Bruckner Tim A, Catalano Ralph
Program in Public Health, University of California, Irvine, 653 E. Peltason Dr. Suite 2046, 2nd Floor, Irvine, CA 92697-3957, USA.
School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 15 University Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
SSM Popul Health. 2018 Jun 2;5:101-113. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2018.05.010. eCollection 2018 Aug.
Public health researchers may assume, based on the fetal origins literature, that "scarring" of birth cohorts describes the population response to modern-day stressors. We contend, based on extensive literature concerned with selection , that this assumption remains questionable. At least a third and likely many more of human conceptions fail to yield a live birth. Those that survive to birth, moreover, do not represent their conception cohort. Increasing data availability has led to an improved understanding of selection and its implications for population health. The literature describing selection , however, receives relatively little attention from social scientists. We aim to draw attention to the rich theoretical and empirical literature on selection by offering a typology that organizes this diverse work along dimensions we think important, if not familiar, to those studying population health. We further use the typology to identify important gaps in the literature. This work should interest social scientists for two reasons. First, phenomena of broad scholarly interest (i.e., social connectivity, bereavement) affect the extent and timing of selection . Second, the life-course health of a cohort depends in part on the strength of such selection. We conclude by identifying new research directions and with a reconciliation of the apparent contradiction between the "fetal origins" literature and that describing selection .
基于胎儿起源相关文献,公共卫生研究人员可能会认为,出生队列的“瘢痕化”描述了人群对现代应激源的反应。然而,基于大量有关选择的文献,我们认为这一假设仍存在疑问。至少三分之一甚至更多的人类受孕未能实现活产。此外,那些存活至出生的个体并不代表其受孕队列。数据可得性的提高使得人们对选择及其对人群健康的影响有了更深入的理解。然而,描述选择的文献相对较少受到社会科学家的关注。我们旨在通过提供一种类型学来引起人们对有关选择的丰富理论和实证文献的关注,这种类型学将这些多样的研究按照我们认为对研究人群健康的人来说重要(即便不熟悉)的维度进行组织。我们还利用这种类型学来识别文献中的重要空白。这项工作应会引起社会科学家的兴趣,原因有二。其一,具有广泛学术兴趣的现象(如社会联系、丧亲之痛)会影响选择的程度和时机。其二,一个队列的生命历程健康部分取决于这种选择的强度。我们通过确定新的研究方向以及调和“胎儿起源”文献与描述选择的文献之间明显的矛盾来得出结论。