ArticleScientific reports2024
In utero and childhood exposure to the great Chinese famine and risk of aging in adulthood.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epigenetic legacies of famine: mechanistic pathways to obesity in modern environments.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- The Potential Physiologic Mechanisms by Which Early-Life Nutrition May Influence Type 2 Diabetes Pathophysiology in Humans.Annual review of nutrition · 2026Review
- Remembrance of things past: Towards a life-course biology of aging.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Epigenetics and chemical exposures.Essays in biochemistry · 2025Article
- The association between early-life famine exposure and adulthood risk of thyroid diseases.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background Early-life exposure to famine may influence the occurrence of chronic diseases and aging in midlife among those exposed. This study aims to explore the relationship between exposure to the Chinese Great Famine and aging in middle-aged individuals. Methods Participants born in 1963-1965 (unexposed), 1959-1961 (in utero exposure), and 1955-1957 (childhood exposure) from the Kailuan Study were included. Their biological age at 2010, 2014, and 2018 was investigated, and age acceleration (biological age minus actual age) was calculated to assess aging. Logistic regression analysis was employed to describe the relationship between famine exposure and the aging risk. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were conducted to explore differences and stability in this relationship among different groups. Results A total of 17,543 participants were included in this study. Among them, 12,762 (72.7%) were male, and 4,781 (27.3%) were female, with 2,543 participants experiencing aging events. Compared to unexposed participants, those exposed during childhood and in utero exhibited a 1.69-fold (OR = 1.69, 95%CI: 1.53-1.87) and 1.22-fold (OR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.08-1.37) increased risk of aging. Subgroup analysis revealed an interaction with income (P for interaction = 0.008), and additional interaction analysis suggested that increasing income could partially mitigate the detrimental effects of early-life famine exposure. Furthermore, experiencing famine in severely affected regions exacerbated the risk of aging (OR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.21-1.63). Conclusion Exposure to famine in utero or during childhood may elevate the risk of midlife aging among exposed individuals, and these relationships are influenced by the severity of famine exposure. Increasing income may also help mitigate these effects.Trial registration: Kailuan study, ChiCTRTNRC11001489. Registered July 19, 2015 Retrospectively registered, https//www.chictr.org.cn/showprojEN.html?proj=8050&u_atoken=af46a0dee8d73f320bb5459ab7bbcfa9&u_asig=1a0c381017255295896468605e00cf .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.