Peng Yu
Bin Yu
Wanjie Tang
Shujuan Yang- 1West China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
- 2Institute for Disaster Management and Reconstruction, Sichuan University-The Hong Kong, Chengdu, China
- 3Health Promotion and Food Nutrition & Safety Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China
- 4International Institute of Spatial Health Epidemiology (ISLE), Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Editorial on the Research Topic
Environmental risk factors and psychosomatic disorders
Psychosomatic disorders are traditionally defined as a distinct group of conditions primarily driven by stress and psychological distress. These disorders are influenced by environmental exposures (environmental pollution), and social environmental factors (social structures, cultural norms, gender roles, and behavioral settings). This Research Topic aimed to synthesize current evidence on the associations between environmental risk factors and psychosomatic disorders, and to explore pathways for effective prevention and intervention.
The evolving paradigm of environment in psychosomatic research
The conceptualization of “environment” in psychosomatic research has undergone evolution, moving beyond primarily focusing on air pollutants and toxic substances (1–4) to encompass a far more complex landscape of risk, such as social structures (5–7), family stability (8, 9), cultural norms (10, 11), lifestyle choices (12), and community safety (13). This expanded conception is essential because these diverse environmental factors influence the susceptibility to psychosomatic disorders through stress-physiology-behavior mechanism (14, 15) involving stress appraisal (16), autonomic and neuroendocrine dysregulation, immune activation, and behavioral adaptation (14–18). For example, the link between air pollution and depression may be attributed to the imbalance of neurotransmitters through the central nervous system stress mechanism (19). In addition, built environment, neighborhood socioeconomic status, walkability, and greenness, are significantly associated with symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (20). These findings highlight the important role of environmental factors in the risk of psychosomatic disorders.
Evidence from observational studies
From the perspective of the social-ecological model (21, 22), various dimensions of the social environment, encompassing individual, familial, and social factors, serve as chronic stressors, inducing sustained psychosomatic disorders (23). Thus, considering multifaceted social environmental factors into the risk of psychosomatic disorders is fundamental to advancing etiological understanding and formulating comprehensive public health strategies. Evidence from the presented studies, from individual to societal factors, establishes a clear link between these environments and psychosomatic health.
First, socio-cultural structures and family environment are known to influence the development of psychosomatic disorders. A cross-sectional study by Gao et al., indicated that women from the matrilineal Mosuo society showed a milder menopausal symptom, as measured by the Kupperman Menopause Index, and a lower score for concerns and fears about illness on the Self-Rating Scale of Illness Conception and Health Seeking Behavior, compared to women from patrilineal Han and Yi societies. This suggested that that cultural systems affording women higher social status and robust support networks may buffer against the psychosomatic manifestations associated with physiological transitions. Meanwhile, a large-scale, multicenter cross-sectional study by Wei et al., using Rome IV criteria, reported that separation from father only was an independent risk factor for irritable bowel syndrome in rural Chinese left-behind children, with a stronger association than separation from mother. This finding suggested that rural-to-urban migration was a critical environmental risk for psychosomatic disorders, potentially mediated through gut-brain interactions in a vulnerable pediatric population. these findings illustrate socio-cultural and familial factors could elicit psychological distress, and ultimately led to specific somatic symptoms (24–26).
Second, community violence operates as a pervasive psychosocial stressor with broad impacts. One study conducted by Iktilat et al., showed a direct positive association between exposure to violence, measured by the Screen for Adolescent Violence Exposure questionnaire, and psychological distress, assessed by the Kessler 6 scale, in middle-aged Muslims in Israel. This association was significant for both men and women after adjusting for age, education level, socioeconomic status, suggesting that the psychological impact was pervasive across genders in high-violence environments. This finding indicates that violent environments, as intense psychological stressors, exert widespread detrimental effects on individual psychosomatic health (27, 28).
Third, modern lifestyles, such as night-shift work and excessive smartphone use, has emerged as an important risk environment for psychosomatic health. Guo et al. showed a potential causal relationship between various lifestyles and major depressive disorder using Mendelian randomization approach, identifying mood swings, weekly usage of mobile phone and sleeplessness/insomnia as significant risk factors. This study suggests that modern lifestyle factors (e.g., insomnia, excessive phone use, and diet) represent inherent modern behaviors that act as both a source and manifestation of chronic stress, which in turn causes psychosomatic disorders like depression via mechanisms including circadian rhythm disruption (29, 30).
Outlook for future research
The evidence presented in this Research Topic marks an advancement of psychosomatic disorders in our understanding. From cross-sectional study to longitudinal study, this topic has established the associations between environmental factors and psychosomatic disorders. The findings reveal that the risk factors of psychosomatic disorders are multifaceted, including cultural context, social adversity (separation and violence), and lifestyle behaviors.
These studies advocate for adopting a broader and more inclusive definition of environmental risk in the field of psychosomatic medicine. They demonstrated that the risk factors for psychosomatic disorders is across multiple levels, including sociocultural, community, and individual domains (31). The present findings further validate the pivotal role of the sociocultural environment and underscore the necessity of culturally adapted interventions.
Future research would leverage diverse methodological approaches, including large-scale longitudinal studies, quasi-experimental designs, and randomized controlled trials, to elucidate the complex biological mechanisms linking environmental exposures to psychosomatic disorders, as well as to identify modifiable factors. Such evidence will support the prioritization and formulation of public health strategies targeting modifiable environmental and lifestyle risk factors, ultimately aimed at reducing the global burden of psychosomatic disorders.
Author contributions
PY: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. BY: Writing – review & editing. WT: Writing – review & editing. SY: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Conceptualization.
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Zhang N, Yang S, and Jia P. Cultivating resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A socioecological perspective. Annu Rev Psychol. (2022) 73:575–98. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-030221-031857
2. Cai C, Zhu S, Qin M, Li X, Feng C, Yu B, et al. Long-term exposure to PM2.5 chemical constituents and diabesity: evidence from a multi-center cohort study in China. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. (2024) 47:101100. doi: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2024.101100
3. Feng C, Yang B, Wang Z, Zhang J, Fu Y, Yu B, et al. Relationship of long-term exposure to air pollutant mixture with metabolic-associated fatty liver disease and subtypes: A retrospective cohort study of the employed population of Southwest China. Environ Int. (2024) 188:108734. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.108734
4. Yang S, Fu Y, Dong S, Yang B, Li Z, Feng C, et al. Association between perceived noise at work and mental health among employed adults in Southwest China. J Affect Disord. (2023) 343:22–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.09.029
5. Akinyelure OP, Jaeger BC, Safford MM, Oparil S, Carson AP, Sims A, et al. Social determinants of health and incident apparent treatment-resistant hypertension among white and black US adults: the REGARDS study. J Am Heart Assoc. (2024) 13:e031695. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.031695
6. Hill-Briggs F, Ephraim PL, Vrany EA, Davidson KW, Pekmezaris R, Salas-Lopez D, et al. Social determinants of health, race, and diabetes population health improvement: black/african americans as a population exemplar. Curr Diabetes Rep. (2022) 22:117–28. doi: 10.1007/s11892-022-01454-3
7. Garcini LM, Nguyen K, Lucas-Marinelli A, Moreno O, and Cruz PL. No one left behind”: A social determinant of health lens to the wellbeing of undocumented immigrants. Curr Opin Psychol. (2022) 47:101455. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101455
8. Grüning Parache L, Vogel M, Meigen C, Kiess W, and Poulain T. Family structure, socioeconomic status, and mental health in childhood. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. (2024) 33:2377–86. doi: 10.1007/s00787-023-02329-y
9. Hafstad GS, Sætren SS, Wentzel-Larsen T, and Augusti EM. Adolescents’ symptoms of anxiety and depression before and during the Covid-19 outbreak – A prospective population-based study of teenagers in Norway. Lancet Reg Health Eur. (2021) 5:100093. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100093
10. Shah NS, Kandula NR, Commodore-Mensah Y, Morey BN, Patel SA, Wong S, et al. Social determinants of cardiovascular health in asian americans: A scientific statement from the american heart association. Circulation. (2024) 150:e296–315. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001278
11. Chen MS, Cai Q, Omari D, Sanghvi DE, Lyu S, and Bonanno GA. Emotion regulation and mental health across cultures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nat Hum Behav. (2025) 9:1176–200. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02168-8
12. Sarris J, Thomson R, Hargraves F, Eaton M, de Manincor M, Veronese N, et al. Multiple lifestyle factors and depressed mood: a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank (N = 84,860). BMC Med. (2020) 18:354. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01813-5
13. Roberts H and Helbich M. Multiple environmental exposures along daily mobility paths and depressive symptoms: A smartphone-based tracking study. Environ Int. (2021) 156:106635. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106635
14. Yuan M, Yang B, Rothschild G, Mann JJ, Sanford LD, Tang X, et al. Epigenetic regulation in major depression and other stress-related disorders: molecular mechanisms, clinical relevance and therapeutic potential. Signal Transduct Target Ther. (2023) 8:309. doi: 10.1038/s41392-023-01519-z
15. Assary E, Oginni OA, Morneau-Vaillancourt G, Krebs G, Peel AJ, Palaiologou E, et al. Genetics of environmental sensitivity and its association with variations in emotional problems, autistic traits, and wellbeing. Mol Psychiatry. (2024) 29:2438–46. doi: 10.1038/s41380-024-02508-6
16. Morella IM, Brambilla R, and Morè L. Emerging roles of brain metabolism in cognitive impairment and neuropsychiatric disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. (2022) 142:104892. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104892
17. Xu W, Jiang W, Ding R, Tao H, Wang Y, Tang Y, et al. Study of rates and factors associated to psychosomatic syndromes assessed using the diagnostic criteria for psychosomatic research across different clinical settings. Psychother Psychosom. (2024) 93:386–96. doi: 10.1159/000541404
18. Paladini MS, Spero V, Begni V, Marchisella F, Guidi A, Gruca P, et al. Behavioral and molecular effects of the antipsychotic drug blonanserin in the chronic mild stress model. Pharmacol Res. (2021) 163:105330. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105330
19. Pan C, Qi X, Yang X, Cheng B, Cheng S, Liu L, et al. Large-scale plasma proteomics uncovers novel targets linking ambient air pollution and depression. Mol Psychiatry. (2025) 30:3650–9. doi: 10.1038/s41380-025-02953-x
20. Mehta UV, Wilt GE, Roscoe C, Okereke OI, Coull BA, James P, et al. The association between multiple environmental exposures and symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder in a prospective, US-based cohort study. Environ Health Perspectives. (2025) 133:067008. doi: 10.1289/EHP14458
21. Picardi S, Abrahms BL, and Merkle JA. Scale at the interface of spatial and social ecology. Philos Trans R Soc B: Biol Sci. (1912) 2024:379. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0523
22. Twis M, Cimino AN, Plunk M, Mendenhall A, and Mancus G. Correlates of youth sex trafficking in the United States: the role of the environment in shaping vulnerability and demand. Trauma Violence Abuse. (2025), 15248380251317214. doi: 10.1177/15248380251317214
23. Haslam SA, Fong P, Haslam C, and Cruwys T. Connecting to community: A social identity approach to neighborhood mental health. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. (2024) 28:251–75. doi: 10.1177/10888683231216136
24. Trindade IA, Hreinsson JP, Melchior C, Algera JP, Colomier E, Törnblom H, et al. Global prevalence of psychological distress and comorbidity with disorders of gut-brain interactions. Am J Gastroenterol. (2024) 119:165–75. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002500
25. Brandt L, Liu S, Heim C, and Heinz A. The effects of social isolation stress and discrimination on mental health. Transl Psychiatry. (2022) 12:398. doi: 10.1038/s41398-022-02178-4
26. Fernandez A, Askenazy F, Zeghari R, Auby P, Robert P, Thümmler S, et al. Somatic and posttraumatic stress symptoms in children and adolescents in France. JAMA Netw Open. (2024) 7:e247193. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.7193
27. Gresham B, Morency M, Corcoran F, Kunkel J, and Riegelman A. Exposure to community violence and biomarkers of allostatic load: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. (2025) 151:1040–60. doi: 10.1037/bul0000488
28. Dokkedahl SB, Kirubakaran R, Bech-Hansen D, Kristensen TR, and Elklit A. The psychological subtype of intimate partner violence and its effect on mental health: a systematic review with meta-analyses. Syst Rev. (2022) 11:163. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-02025-z
29. Zhang M, Zhou C, Li X, Li H, Han Q, Chen Z, et al. Interactions between gut microbiota, host circadian rhythms, and metabolic diseases. Adv Nutr. (2025) 16:100416. doi: 10.1016/j.advnut.2025.100416
30. Zhou L, Saltoun K, Carrier J, Storch KF, Dunbar RIM, and Bzdok D. Multimodal population study reveals the neurobiological underpinnings of chronotype. Nat Hum Behav. (2025) 9:1442–56. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02182-w
Keywords: environmental pollution, environmental risk (ER), environmental risk factors, psychosomatic disorders, social environmental factors
Citation: Yu P, Yu B, Tang W and Yang S (2026) Editorial: Environmental risk factors and psychosomatic disorders. Front. Psychiatry 16:1751096. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1751096
Received: 21 November 2025; Accepted: 08 December 2025; Revised: 02 December 2025;
Published: 05 January 2026.
Edited and reviewed by:
Veena Kumari, Brunel University London, United KingdomCopyright © 2026 Yu, Yu, Tang and Yang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Shujuan Yang, cmVraW55QDEyNi5jb20=; eWFuZ3NqQHNjdS5lZHUuY24=; Wanjie Tang, VGFuZ3dhbmppZUBzY3UuZWR1LmNu