Background: Neighborhoods are critical to understanding how environments influence health outcomes. Prolonged environmental stressors, such as a lack of green spaces and neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage, have been associated with higher allostatic load levels. Since allostatic load levels experienced earlier in life have stronger associations with mortality risk, neighborhoods may be uniquely suited to monitor and mitigate the impacts of environmental stressors. Researchers often study allostatic load in neighborhoods by utilizing administrative boundaries within publicly accessible databases as proxies for neighborhoods. Methods: This systematic review of reviews aims to identify commonly used biomarkers in the measurement of allostatic load, compare measurement approaches, inventory databases to study allostatic load, and spotlight considerations referenced in the literature where allostatic load is studied in neighborhoods. The review was conducted using the search term “allostatic load” in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsychINFO databases. The search results were filtered to include reviews. Results: The search returned 499 articles after deduplication. Overall, 18 synthesis reviews met the inclusion criteria and were retained for extraction. The synthesis reviews analyzed represented 238 studies published from 1995 to 2020. The original ten biomarkers were most often used to measure allostatic load. More recently, body mass index and C-reactive protein have additionally been frequently used to measure allostatic load burden. Conclusions: The scientific contributions of this study are that we have identified a clear gap in geographic considerations when studying allostatic load. The implication of this study is that we have highlighted geographic concepts when conducting neighborhood-level research using administrative databases as a neighborhood proxy and outlined emerging future trends that can enable future study of allostatic load in the neighborhood context.

To evaluate the NIH All of Us Research Program database as a potential data source for studying allostatic load and stress among adults in the United States (US). We evaluated the All of Us database to determine sample size significance for original-10 allostatic load biomarkers, Allostatic Load Index-5 (ALI-5), Allostatic Load Five, and Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We conducted a priori, post hoc, and sensitivity power analyses to determine sample sizes for conducting null hypothesis significance tests. The maximum number of responses available for each measure is 21 participants for the original-10 allostatic load biomarkers, 150 for the ALI-5, 22 476 for Allostatic Load Five, and n = 90 583 for the PSS. The NIH All of Us Research Program is well-suited for studying allostatic load using the Allostatic Load Five and psychological stress using PSS. Improving biomarker data collection in All of Us will facilitate more nuanced examinations of allostatic load among US adults.

Preventing Chronic Disease (PCD) is a peer-reviewed electronic journal established by the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. PCD provides an open exchange of information and knowledge among researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and others who strive to improve the health of the public through chronic disease prevention.

Purpose: The National Institute of Health's All of Us Research Program represents a national effort to develop a database to advance health research, especially among individuals historically underrepresented in research, including rural populations. The purpose of this study was to describe the rural populations identified in the All of Us Research Program using the only proxy measure currently available in the dataset.Methods: Currently, the All of Us Research Program provides a proxy measure of rurality that identifies participants who self‐reported delaying care due to far travel distances associated with living in rural areas. Using the All of Us Controlled Tier Dataset v6, we compared sociodemographic and health characteristics of All of Us rural participants identified via this proxy to rural US residents from nationally representative data sources using chi‐squared tests.Results: 3.1% of 160,880 All of Us participants were rural, compared to 15%‐20% of US residents based on commonly accepted rural definitions. Proportionally more rural All of Us participants reported fair or poor health status, history of cancer, and history of heart disease (P<.01).Conclusions: The All of Us measure may capture a subset of underserved participants who live in rural areas and experience health care access barriers due to distance. Researchers who use this proxy measure to characterize rurality should interpret their findings with caution due to differences in population and health characteristics using this proxy measure rural compared to other commonly used rural definitions.

Neighborhoods have been the focus of health researchers seeking to develop upstream strategies to mitigate downstream disease development. In recent years, neighborhoods have become a primary target in efforts to promote health and resilience following deleterious social conditions such as the climate crisis, extreme weather events, the global pandemic, and supply chain disruptions. Children are often the most vulnerable populations after experiencing unexpected shocks. To examine and describe conceptually the construct of Neighborhood Resilience, we conducted a comprehensive scoping review using the terms (“resilience” or “resiliency” or “resilient”) AND (“neighborhood”), utilizing MEDLINE (through PubMed) and CINAHL (through EBSCOhost) databases, to assess overall neighborhood themes that impact resilience. A total of 57 articles were extracted that met inclusion criteria. Extracted characteristics included study purpose, country of origin, key findings, environmental protective/risk factors. The analysis revealed a positive relationship between neighborhood resource density, neighborhood resiliency, and individual resiliency. This study reports the finding for studies with a population focus of pre-school age and school age children (1.5–18 years of age). Broadly, we identified that the primary goals regarding neighborhood resilience for childhood can be conceptualized as all activities and resources that (a) prevent trauma during childhood development and/or (b) mitigate or heal childhood trauma once it has occurred. This goal conceptually encompasses antecedents that increase protective factors and reduces risk factors for children and their families. This comprehensive look at the literature showed that a neighborhood’s ability to build, promote, and maintain resiliency is often largely dependent on the flexible resources (i.e., knowledge, money, power, prestige, and beneficial social connections) that are available.