Skip to content
PaperFren

multimorbidity

What midlife factors drive cardiometabolic multimorbidity?

Singh-Manoux A, Fayosse A, Sabia S, et al. · PLoS medicine · 2018

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

In 8,270 Whitehall II adults followed ~24 years, clinical risk at 50 best predicted first cardiometabolic disease, while socioeconomic and behavioural factors better predicted progression to multimorbidity and death.

Key findings

2,501 developed one cardiometabolic disease, 511 multimorbidity, and 1,406 died. Least vs most favourable clinical profile predicted first disease (HR 3.74). Socioeconomic and behavioural factors predicted multimorbidity progression; only behavioural factors predicted mortality after disease.

Methodology

Assessed clinical, socioeconomic, and behavioural risk scales at age 50 in the Whitehall II cohort and modelled transitions from healthy → first cardiometabolic disease → multimorbidity → death over mean 23.7 years.

Limitations

Observational Whitehall II data cannot prove causality; findings are midlife risk scales in UK civil servants and may not generalize to all populations or non-cardiometabolic multimorbidity.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsMultimorbidityconcept

    Midlife clinical, socioeconomic, and behavioural profiles predict cardiometabolic multimorbidity and death.

    In Whitehall II, least vs most favourable clinical profiles at age 50 strongly predicted first cardiometabolic disease (HR ~3.7); socioeconomic and behavioural factors additionally predicted progression to multimorbidity and mortality.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsMultimorbidityconcept

    Age-50 risk factors for incident cardiometabolic multimorbidity/death vs Elderly inpatient chronic-disease/multimorbidity spectrum

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.