99. The Effects of Family and Neighborhood Characteristics During Middle Childhood on Adolescent Depression

Poorer neighborhood quality and lower household income during childhood have each been associated with negative mental health outcomes in adolescence, including increased risk of depression. However, less research has assessed the protective effects of higher quality neighborhoods for youth who reside in lower-income households. The purpose of this study is to assess the independent and interactive effects of household income and neighborhood quality during middle childhood (6-12 years of age) on adolescent depression. Using cross-sectional data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) 2013 core survey and corresponding 2014 Childhood Retrospective Circumstances Study (CRCS) supplement (n=8,072), we estimated logistic regression models to assess the effects of neighborhood quality and household income during middle childhood, as well their interaction, on adolescent depression. Analyses used weights to account for the complex sampling design of PSID (including stratification, clustering, and differential selection probabilities) and accounted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and perceived financial struggles. The sample was 53% female, and 77% White, non-Hispanic, 11% Black, non-Hispanic, 6% Hispanic and 6% Multi/Other race. The average age was 50 years, 1% reported receipt of government assistance during middle childhood, and 3% endorsed depression anytime from 13-16 years of age. Lower household income was not associated with odds of adolescent depression (aOR: 1.07; 95CI: 0.69, 1.68); however, there was a significant association between increased neighborhood quality and decreased odds of adolescent depression (aOR: 0.82; 95CI: 0.73, 0.92). In the full model, there was a significant interaction between household income and neighborhood quality (aOR: 1.29; 95CI: 1.04, 1.59) indicating that those with the greatest odds of endorsing adolescent depression were youth with higher household incomes residing in the poorest quality neighborhoods; the odds of endorsing adolescent depression decreased for youth with higher household incomes as neighborhood quality increased. There was no difference in the odds of endorsing adolescent depression for youth in lower income households based on neighborhood quality. Neighborhood quality during middle childhood had the greatest effect on endorsement of adolescent depression for youth in households with higher incomes; youth in higher income households living in poorer quality neighborhoods demonstrated greater odds of endorsing adolescent depression than their lower-income household counterparts. Yet, the odds of endorsing adolescent depression for youth with lower household incomes did not differ based on neighborhood quality. However, other underlying factors like access to health and mental health services, which were not explicitly measured in our study, may have influenced our findings. Directing resources toward neighborhood-level supports may be effective in decreasing the risk of adolescent depression; however, our findings suggest that these interventions are likely to benefit youth with higher household incomes more than those with lower household incomes. Future research should continue to assess how varying household and neighborhood contexts throughout childhood and adolescence, along with factors such as access to mental health services, contribute to adolescent mental health.