| Title |
Influence of social support and rearing behavior on psychosocial health in left-behind children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-017-0592-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haiyan Xing, Wei Yu, Fengjiao Xu, Sanmei Chen |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study is to examine psychological health of left-behind children (LBC), social support and rearing behavior towards LBC as well as their correlations in the city of Shaoxing, China. By stratified sampling, 401 LBC and 527 non-left-behind children (NLBC) had completed the questionnaires in 2014. Spearman's correlation was performed to clarify the relationship between psychological health, social support and rearing behavior in LBC. Multiple linear regression analytical methods were used to identify the variables that were associated with psychological health. Compared to NLBC, LBC got lower scores in psychological health, general social support, subjective support and emotional warmth, but higher in rejection. Psychological health was positively correlated with social support, and negatively with rearing behavior (rejection, overprotection) in LBC. It was also closely connected with the subjective support, rejection and general health status. These data show that LBC suffer significant impairment on psychological health, and receive less social support and worse rearing behavior than NLBC. Psychological health may be affected by subjective support, rejection, and general health status. Urgent government assessment and support from the community, school, mental health systems are warranted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2017.
All research outputs
#17,863,974
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,499
of 2,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#291,585
of 417,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#27
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 417,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.