‘Extremely Concerning’ Stroke Risk For Children Of Divorced Parents

Forbes - Jan 24th, 2025

A study involving over 13,000 Americans indicates that adults whose parents divorced during their childhood are nearly two-thirds more likely to suffer a stroke later in life. This observational research highlights a 60% increased risk of stroke for those who experienced parental divorce before the age of 18, comparable to established risk factors such as diabetes. The study accounted for variables like depression, diabetes, and social isolation, reinforcing the significant correlation between parental divorce and stroke risk.

The findings underscore the broader impact of childhood experiences on long-term health, suggesting that parental divorce should be considered a potential risk factor for stroke. While the study did not establish a causal relationship or explore specific reasons behind the increased risk, it aligns with prior research linking adverse childhood experiences to health issues. The implications of these findings are significant in understanding stroke risks, with stroke remaining a leading cause of death and disability in the U.S., affecting hundreds of thousands annually and costing billions in healthcare and productivity losses.

Parental Divorce Stroke Risk Childhood Adversity Health Study Centres For Disease Control And Prevention Esme Fuller Thomson Plos One

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.6

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article presents a well-researched and timely exploration of the potential link between parental divorce and increased stroke risk. It effectively communicates the study's findings, providing valuable insights into a novel risk factor for a significant public health issue. The article is clear, readable, and engaging, making it accessible to a wide audience. However, it could benefit from greater transparency regarding the study's methodology and potential biases, as well as a more balanced presentation of differing perspectives. While the article raises important questions and contributes to the ongoing discourse on stroke risk factors, its impact on policy or societal change is likely limited by the observational nature of the study. Overall, the article is a credible and informative piece that adds depth to the conversation about the long-term effects of childhood experiences on health.

Accuracy

The article accurately presents the main findings of the study, stating that older adults whose parents divorced when they were children have a higher likelihood of experiencing a stroke later in life. This claim is supported by the study's findings, which indicate a 60% increased risk, consistent with the data presented. The article also correctly notes the limitations of the study, such as its observational nature and lack of causation proof. However, some details, like the specific surveillance system used, are not clarified, which slightly detracts from precision. Overall, the factual basis is robust, with minor areas needing further verification.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the study's findings about the increased stroke risk associated with parental divorce without extensively exploring opposing viewpoints or alternative explanations. While it mentions that the study is observational and cannot prove causation, it does not delve into potential criticisms or differing interpretations of the data. Additionally, the article could benefit from including perspectives from other experts in the field to provide a more balanced view. Despite these omissions, the piece does not exhibit overt favoritism or bias toward the study's conclusions.

Clarity

The article is well-written and easy to understand, with a clear structure and logical flow of information. It effectively communicates the study's findings and their implications for public health. The language is neutral and avoids technical jargon, making it accessible to a general audience. The inclusion of background information on stroke and its symptoms further aids comprehension. Overall, the article is concise and informative, with no significant clarity issues.

Source quality

The article references a study published in a reputable journal (PLOS One) and utilizes data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which are credible sources. However, it does not provide direct links or citations to these sources, which would enhance transparency and allow readers to verify the information independently. The absence of additional expert opinions or commentary from other researchers slightly limits the depth of source variety, but the primary sources used are authoritative and reliable.

Transparency

The article provides a general overview of the study's methodology, noting its observational nature and the variables considered. However, it lacks detailed explanations of the study's design, data collection methods, and potential conflicts of interest. This lack of depth in methodological transparency may leave readers with questions about how the study's conclusions were reached. Additionally, the article does not disclose any potential biases or affiliations of the researchers involved, which could impact perceived impartiality.