Health: Understanding the links between cardiovascular and psychiatric conditions

Individuals recently diagnosed with a cardiovascular disease are at higher risk of developing a mental illness, with mortality increasing when both conditions are present.
  1. Sonali Amarasekera
  2. Prabhat Jha  Is a corresponding author
  1. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Epidemiology Division, University of Toronto, Canada
  2. Centre for Global Health, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of mortality worldwide, accounting for approximately 32% of all deaths globally. Mental illnesses are similarly common, with approximately one in every eight individuals living with a mental health disorder in 2019 (World Health Organization, 2022). Given their high prevalence, these conditions are likely to exist alongside each other and this co-occurrence warrants rigorous scientific investigation.

The relationship between heart disease and mental illness is complex and bidirectional. For example, being diagnosed with heart failure can understandably cause stress and despair, and consequently elevate an individual’s risk of developing a major depressive disorder (Hare et al., 2014). Conversely, depressive disorders are known to manifest as sleep disturbances, reduced levels of physical activity and difficulty following health recommendations — all factors linked to an increased likelihood of developing cardiovascular conditions.

Evidence exists that the risks for mental and cardiovascular diseases increase in tandem (Schöttke and Giabbiconi, 2015; Ziegelstein, 2001). However, this body of work has important limitations that hinder drawing meaningful conclusions. For example, some studies only capture patient information at a single point in time, making it difficult to establish whether it was the cardiovascular or the psychiatric condition which appeared first in individuals with both illnesses (Almhdawi et al., 2021). In addition, research in this area has mainly focused on the relationship between cardiovascular health and depression or generalized anxiety disorder, with little attention paid to other psychiatric conditions such as psychosis and bipolar disorder. Lastly, no studies have so far adequately accounted for family-related mechanisms that may be driving any observed associations, such as certain genetic backgrounds or early childhood environments. Now, in eLife, Unnur Valdimarsdóttir, Qing Shen and colleagues report the results of a study designed to address some of these limitations (Shen et al., 2022).

The team (who are based in China, the United States, Iceland and Sweden) used the Swedish Patient Register to identify nearly 0.9 million individuals recently diagnosed with cardiovascular disease, and with no prior history of psychiatric disorders. Throughout the study period, these patients were then followed until they first received a mental health diagnosis within the study period. In addition, the study included a remarkable family-comparison design, whereby participants’ siblings who had no mental health or cardiovascular conditions at the time of the diagnosis were also tracked over time. The risk of developing any psychiatric condition in both patients and siblings could therefore be compared. This approach allowed Shen et al. to control for familial factors that are often difficult to measure and, if left unaccounted for in study design, could contribute to a spurious association between cardiovascular disorders and subsequent mental illness.

The results indicate that, compared to their unaffected siblings, study participants were 2.7 times more at risk of developing a psychiatric disorder within a year of having received their diagnoses of cardiovascular illness (even after accounting for familial factors, prior history of psychiatric illness and sociodemographic variables such as age, sex or socioeconomic status). Similar associations were observed when study participants were compared to non-sibling controls. In addition, individuals who developed a psychiatric disorder during that first year had a 55% increased risk of dying from a heart-related condition compared to patients who retained good mental health. In this cohort, the co-occurrence of any mental illness therefore negatively impacted the course of cardiovascular diseases.

Despite its strengths, this work also has some limitations. Notably, smoking behaviour and alcohol consumption were not adequately controlled for, despite being directly and independently associated with cardiovascular disease and mental illnesses (Dani and Harris, 2005; Mukamal, 2006). Not accounting for either of these lifestyle factors could overestimate the true relationship between these two conditions. In addition, various psychiatric subtypes with distinct phenotypes were combined — for example, all types of anxiety conditions, from generalized anxiety to post-traumatic stress disorder, were merged into a single mental health outcome. Each of these disorders is likely to have specific associations with cardiovascular health, which could not be captured by this experimental design.

The work by Shen et al. highlights how important it is to monitor psychiatric symptoms while treating cardiovascular diseases. Their findings should encourage the scientific community to fill existing knowledge gaps. In particular, it is becoming increasingly clear that evidence derived from high-income countries, where most research is conducted, cannot be directly translated to other settings. For instance, age-standardized mortality rates for cardiovascular disease are mostly decreasing in European and North American populations, while suicide mortality (as an indicator of mental health burdens) rises with age. By contrast, cardiac mortality rates are rising in certain low- and middle-income countries such as Mexico and India, with suicide mortality occurring at younger ages (Reynales-Shigematsu et al., 2018; Ke et al., 2018; World Health Organization, 2022; Phillips and Cheng, 2012). Context-specific data will therefore need to be collected for cardiovascular diseases to be appropriately managed across the world through integrated healthcare approaches.


    1. Mukamal KJ
    The effects of smoking and drinking on cardiovascular disease and risk factors
    Alcohol Research & Health 29:199–202.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sonali Amarasekera

    Sonali Amarasekera is in the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Epidemiology Division, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2699-7780
  2. Prabhat Jha

    Prabhat Jha is at the Centre for Global Health, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    For correspondence
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7067-8341

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: December 2, 2022 (version 1)


© 2022, Amarasekera and Jha

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.


  • 299
    Page views
  • 31
  • 0

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Sonali Amarasekera
  2. Prabhat Jha
Health: Understanding the links between cardiovascular and psychiatric conditions
eLife 11:e84524.

Further reading

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    Tina Bech Olesen, Henry Jensen ... Morten Rasmussen
    Research Article

    Background: Worldwide, most colorectal cancer screening programmes were paused at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, whilst the Danish faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based programme continued without pausing. We examined colorectal cancer screening participation and compliance with subsequent colonoscopy in Denmark throughout the pandemic.

    Methods: We used data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database among individuals aged 50-74 years old invited to participate in colorectal cancer screening from 2018-2021 combined with population-wide registries. Using a generalised linear model, we estimated prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of colorectal cancer screening participation within 90 days since invitation and compliance with colonoscopy within 60 days since a positive FIT test during the pandemic in comparison with the previous years adjusting for age, month and year of invitation.

    Results: Altogether, 3,133,947 invitations were sent out to 1,928,725 individuals and there were 94,373 positive FIT tests (in 92,848 individuals) during the study period. Before the pandemic, 60.7% participated in screening within 90 days. A minor reduction in participation was observed at the start of the pandemic (PR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.94-0.96 in pre-lockdown and PR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.85-0.86 in 1st lockdown) corresponding to a participation rate of 54.9% during pre-lockdown and 53.0% during 1st lockdown. This was followed by a 5-10% increased participation in screening corresponding to a participation rate of up to 64.9%. The largest increase in participation was observed among 55-59 year olds and among immigrants. The compliance with colonoscopy within 60 days was 89.9% before the pandemic. A slight reduction was observed during 1st lockdown (PR=0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.98), where after it resumed to normal levels.

    Conclusions: Participation in the Danish FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme and subsequent compliance to colonoscopy after a positive FIT result was only slightly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Funding: The study was funded by the Danish Cancer Society Scientific Committee (grant number R321-A17417) and the Danish regions.

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    2. Medicine
    Nathan J Cheetham, Milla Kibble ... Claire J Steves
    Research Article

    Background: SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels can be used to assess humoral immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, and may predict risk of future infection. Higher levels of SARS-CoV-2 anti-Spike antibodies are known to be associated with increased protection against future SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, variation in antibody levels and risk factors for lower antibody levels following each round of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have not been explored across a wide range of socio-demographic, SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination, and health factors within population-based cohorts.

    Methods: Samples were collected from 9,361 individuals from TwinsUK and ALSPAC UK population-based longitudinal studies and tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Cross-sectional sampling was undertaken jointly in April-May 2021 (TwinsUK, N = 4,256; ALSPAC, N = 4,622), and in TwinsUK only in November 2021-January 2022 (N = 3,575). Variation in antibody levels after first, second, and third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with health, socio-demographic, SARS-CoV-2 infection and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination variables were analysed. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we tested associations between antibody levels following vaccination and: (1) SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination(s); (2) health, socio-demographic, SARS-CoV-2 infection and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination variables.

    Results: Within TwinsUK, single-vaccinated individuals with the lowest 20% of anti-Spike antibody levels at initial testing had 3-fold greater odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection over the next six to nine months (OR = 2.9, 95% CI: 1.4, 6.0), compared to the top 20%. In TwinsUK and ALSPAC, individuals identified as at increased risk of COVID-19 complication through the UK 'Shielded Patient List' had consistently greater odds (2- to 4-fold) of having antibody levels in the lowest 10%. Third vaccination increased absolute antibody levels for almost all individuals, and reduced relative disparities compared with earlier vaccinations.

    Conclusions: These findings quantify the association between antibody level and risk of subsequent infection, and support a policy of triple vaccination for the generation of protective antibodies.

    Funding: Antibody testing was funded by UK Health Security Agency. The National Core Studies program is funded by COVID-19 Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing - National Core Study (LHW-NCS) HMT/UKRI/MRC (MC_PC_20030 & MC_PC_20059). Related funding was also provided by the NIHR 606 (CONVALESCENCE grant COV-LT-0009). TwinsUK is funded by the Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council, Versus Arthritis, European Union Horizon 2020, Chronic Disease Research Foundation (CDRF), Zoe Ltd and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (CRN) and Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London. The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant ref: 217065/Z/19/Z) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC.