Allostatic (over)Load Measurement: Workflow and repository
Shawna Beese · J. Cross · D. Rice · T. L. DeJong
medRxiv (preprint) · 2025
Read TAP’s NHANES methods case: Same Biomarkers, Different Scores
What the research tells us
A workflow and repository make the construction of a five-marker allostatic-load index inspectable across secondary datasets. The preprint describes the workflow; TAP separately tested sensitivity to reference populations and scoring rules in NHANES 2015–2016.
Scope & interpretation
This methodological preprint focuses on constructing indices and analysis workflows from secondary data. Individual thresholds, responsiveness and predictive performance require dedicated validation. Reuse should identify both the paper and repository version because the code continues to change.
Study at a glance
- POPULATION & SAMPLE
- The source workflow covers three data resources. TAP’s accompanying methods case evaluates 3,152 complete-panel adults aged 40+ in NHANES 2015–2016; this is TAP’s sample, not the sample size of the source paper.
- EXPOSURE / INTERVENTION / SUBJECT
- Five markers: CRP, HbA1c, HDL cholesterol, heart rate or survey pulse, and waist-to-height ratio. Implementation includes data assembly, threshold selection and summing risk flags.
- OUTCOMES
- A calculated allostatic-load index. The workflow’s reproducibility is distinct from validation against disease, mortality or within-person recovery outcomes.
- TIME FRAME
- Preprint version 1: 1 August 2025. Code inspected: commit 2bbb624dd01cec5c54b778d3cd2df4ada582c989 (2026 update). TAP’s own analysis uses one NHANES cycle, 2015–2016.
Cited on this site
Same Biomarkers, Different ScoresEditorial & review record
Record for v1.1 · Updated
Editorial responsibility: TAP Editorial Team
Editorial note
Under the editorial responsibility of the TAP Editorial Team, this publication used AI assistance for content organization and editing.
Download detailed editorial record (JSON) ↓
How responsibilities and review are recorded ↗Scope of this reading note
Preprint abstract, workflow text and a fixed repository version. The linked TAP methods case reports an independent NHANES reconstruction and R checks; it does not reproduce the complete source notebooks or the All of Us/HRS analyses.
- Funding & competing interests
- This record does not independently establish the source publication’s funding or author conflicts. Consult the original preprint’s declarations.
Project support
Founded and supported by Resilio.
Read the editorial standards ↗