Sponsored by:
Despite the advent of novel biomarker data like measures of individuals’ epigenetic age based on DNA methylation, subjective measures like self-rated health continue to provide valuable insight. Indeed, there are key similarities between SRH and epigenetic age. Both are predictive of morbidity and mortality, likely due to their capturing a comprehensive, cross-system profile of health inclusive of both observed and unobserved signals based on standard clinical metrics. Nevertheless, many aspects of their predictive power remain unknown. The predictive validity of SRH is hypothesized as being attributable to “interoception,” or the extent to which individuals’ subconscious perceptions of their body’s physiological state are reflected in their subjective assessments. The few recent studies in this area suggests that this interoceptive hypothesis has merit, and that epigenetic clocks may reveal how individuals’ perceptions of health map onto premature aging at the molecular level. However, further validation is necessary, as these past studies primarily focus on older adults, or draw from samples with more limited generalizability. Moreover, no research has considered population heterogeneity in this relationship. Past work demonstrates how self-rated health exhibits a different association with objective health by gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status; epigenetic clocks can further explain this variation. Consequently, this study will address multiple gaps in the literature through a systematic examination of self-rated health and epigenetic aging in the National Longitudinal Study of Adult to Adolescent Health, focusing on both cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between self-rated health and different epigenetic clocks.