Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage and White Matter Microstructure of the Arcuate Fasciculus and Uncinate Fasciculus in Adolescents

Abstract

Neighborhood or area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with neural alterations across the lifespan. Few studies, however, have examined the effects of neighborhood disadvantage on white matter microstructure during adolescence, an important period of development that coincides with increased risk for psychopathology. In 200 adolescents (ages 13-20 years; 54.5% female, 4% non-binary) recruited from two studies enriched for early adversity and depression, we examined whether neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage derived from census tract data was related to white matter microstructure in several major white matter tracts. We also examined whether depressive symptoms and sex moderated these associations. Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with lower fractional anisotropy (FA) in the left arcuate fasciculus (β=-0.24, FDR-corrected p=0.035) and right uncinate fasciculus (β=-0.32, FDR-corrected p=0.002), above and beyond the effects of family-level socioeconomic status. Depressive symptoms significantly moderated the association between left arcuate fasciculus FA and both neighborhood (β=0.17, FDR-corrected p=0.026) and unemployment disadvantage (β=0.22, FDR-corrected p=0.004), such that these associations were only significant in adolescents who reported less severe depression. Sex did not moderate the association between socioeconomic disadvantage and FA in these tracts. Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage, particularly poverty and education attainment levels, is associated with lower FA in the arcuate fasciculus and uncinate fasciculus, above and beyond family-level measures of socioeconomic status. These patterns were observed only in adolescents with low levels of depression, suggesting that we must be cautious about generalizing these findings to youth who struggle with mental health difficulties.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.