- Macrolevel environmental conditions largely define the context in which microlevel factors operate and affect individual anthropometric status.
- The influence of microlevel socioeconomic factors on anthropometric characteristics appears to be weakening amid relatively stable regional socioeconomic development.
- Psychosocial factors, notably trait anxiety, increasingly contribute to somatic variability, with region-specific associations: anxiety in Moscow and Petrozavodsk; socioeconomic links in Krasnodar.
Am J Hum Biol. 2026 Sep;38(9):e70328. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.70328.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To examine the role of socioeconomic, demographic, and psychosocial factors in variation in final adult values of key anthropometric indicators, including body height, body weight, BMI, and the index of central adiposity, calculated as waist-to-height ratio, at the interindividual and regional levels among contemporary Russian youth.
METHODS: The study was based on comprehensive anthropological surveys of urban university students conducted in 2023-2025 in Barnaul, Krasnodar, Moscow, and Petrozavodsk. A total of 1759 participants, including 770 males and 989 females aged 17-25 years, were examined. Environmental factors were characterized using 20 macrolevel proxy variables (socioeconomic, demographic, and psychosocial) from open data sources and six microlevel proxy variables, including SES indicators and psychological characteristics.
RESULTS: Correlation and regression analyses showed that interindividual somatic variation was partly accounted for by variables related to family socioeconomic status and psychological factors. In the samples from Moscow and Petrozavodsk, anthropometric traits were associated with trait anxiety. Among males from Krasnodar, associations were found with socioeconomic status indicators, particularly maternal education and family size. Differences between cities in the structure of associations indicate that environmental factors are related to somatic variability in different ways across local contexts.
CONCLUSION: Macrolevel environmental conditions largely define the context in which microlevel factors operate and may affect individual anthropometric status. Against the background of relatively stable socioeconomic development in the studied regions, the influence of microlevel socioeconomic factors on anthropometric characteristics appears to be weakening, while psychosocial factors are beginning to play a certain role.
PMID:42669599 | DOI:10.1002/ajhb.70328
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
