Defining and distinguishing early life stress, trauma, adversity, toxic and chronic stress and allostatic load: a descriptive review.

AIMS

Various concepts are used to study the impact of stress on childhood development. These concepts are often used inconsistently or interchangeably. Our main objectives were to determine how selected stress concepts (chronic stress, toxic stress, allostatic load, early life stress, childhood adversity, childhood trauma and adverse childhood experiences; ACEs) are defined, operationalized and described, and to provide a theoretical context to aid the choice for a preferred concept in public health research.

METHODS

For this descriptive review, we systematically searched for literature published before 4 August 2021, on PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo. Two independent reviewers included studies. Exclusion criteria were: no systematic review, not peer reviewed, not published in English, selected stress concepts were no predetermined variable or a substantial topic in the discussion, full text was unobtainable or study described non-human or non-childhood populations. Data extraction forms were used. Descriptives were gathered, publication fields were identified through Journal Citation Reports categories, and verbatim descriptions were ordered in text and Venn diagrams.

RESULTS

Of 264 screened studies, 124 were included. ACEs, childhood adversity and childhood trauma were used most. ACEs were the main concept used most frequently (47.6%). A total of 11 of 14 public and environmental health journals used ACEs. All concepts refer to prolonged, repeated, interpersonal stress from 0 to 18 years, that can alter physiological systems. Four concepts were stressor oriented, two concepts focused on stress response and effect and one on the state of challenged homeostasis.

CONCLUSIONS

ACEs seem most fitting for public health setting, due to their operationalizability, large set of core experiences and widespread use.