Back

Considering social risk alongside genetic risk for bipolar disorder in the All of Us Research Program

Sharp, R. R.; Hysong, M.; Mealer, R. G.; Raffield, L. M.; Glover, L.; Love, M. I.

2026-04-07 genetic and genomic medicine
10.64898/2026.04.06.26349528 medRxiv
Show abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have shown increasing utility for risk stratification across complex diseases, but for psychiatric disorders such as bipolar disorder (BD), current PRS explain only a fraction of disorder liability (~1-9%), with predictive performance further diminished in non-European populations and real-world clinical cohorts. To explore the potential of integrating social and environmental risk factors alongside genetic liability to improve risk prediction, we evaluated the relationship between a PRS for BD (PRSBD) and six social risk measures - perceived stress, discrimination in medical settings, neighborhood social cohesion, perceived neighborhood disorder, cost-related medication nonadherence, and adverse childhood experiences - to BD case status in 115,275 participants (7,000 cases; 108,275 controls) from the All of Us Research Program. PRSBD was associated with BD case status across ancestry groups, though liability-scale variance explained was attenuated relative to what has been reported for curated research cohorts (R2 = 1.86% in European, 0.60% in African, 1.65% in Latino/Admixed American ancestries). Each social risk factor tested exhibited a larger effect size than PRSBD, with perceived stress (OR = 2.05 per SD) and adverse childhood experiences (OR = 2.68 for [≥]4 ACEs) demonstrating the strongest associations. Individuals in the lowest genetic risk decile with high social burden exhibited BD prevalence comparable to or exceeding those in the highest genetic risk decile with low social burden. These findings demonstrate the substantial explanatory power of social risk factors and support the development of integrated genetic-social risk frameworks for more accurate and equitable psychiatric risk prediction.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
27.8%
2
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.9%
3
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.9%
4
Molecular Psychiatry
242 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.4%
5
European Neuropsychopharmacology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
6
American Journal of Psychiatry
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
7
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
8
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
9
Schizophrenia Bulletin
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
10
American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
11
JAMA Psychiatry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
12
Neuropsychopharmacology
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
13
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
14
Brain, Behavior, and Immunity
105 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
16
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
17
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
18
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
20
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 76%
0.7%
21
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
22
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
23
Addiction Biology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
24
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%
25
Human Genetics and Genomics Advances
70 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 67%
0.5%