文章摘要
孙莹,陈明春,孙业桓,王铁柱,曹庆庆,顾超美,韩腾伟,张栋栋,孙丽娜.安徽省某农村地区中小学生伤害与应对方式的相关研究[J].中华流行病学杂志,2011,32(11):1117-1121
安徽省某农村地区中小学生伤害与应对方式的相关研究
Study on injuries and ways of coping to them among primary and middle school students in one rural area of Anhui province
收稿日期:2011-06-14  出版日期:2014-09-18
DOI:
中文关键词: 伤害;应对方式;学生;负二项回归
英文关键词: Injury;Coping style;Student;Negative binomial regression
基金项目:安徽省高校省级自然科学基金(KJ2009A79);安徽省自然科学基金(090413131)
作者单位E-mail
孙莹 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032 yhsun@sina.com 
陈明春 长丰县疾病预防控制中心  
孙业桓 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
王铁柱 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
曹庆庆 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
顾超美 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
韩腾伟 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
张栋栋 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
孙丽娜 安徽医科大学流行病与卫生统计学系, 合肥 230032  
摘要点击次数: 1799
全文下载次数: 846
中文摘要:
      目的解安徽省长丰县农村地区中小学生伤害的流行病学现状,并分析其应对方式等与伤害发生之间的关系。方法 整群抽取安徽省长丰县3所中学、5所小学,对其3~9年级所有学生进行问卷调查。问卷包括一般情况、伤害发生情况以及特质应对方式问卷(TCSQ)等,用以调查伤害发生情况、评价学生应对方式等心理特点。采用负二项回归分析伤害发生的影响因素。结果 共调查长丰县2917名农村中小学生,伤害事件发生率为17.4%。伤害组的积极应对得分为33.98±6.38,非伤害组积极应对得分为33.66±6.37,两组差异无统计学意义(t=0.979,P=0.328)。伤害组的消极应对得分(27.65±7.79)高于非伤害组消极应对得分(26.54±7.62)(t=2.775,P=0.006),且消极应对高度、中度、低度三组的伤害发生率组间比较,差异有统计学意义(x2=6.131,P=0.013)。多因素负二项回归分析显示,在控制人口学变量的潜在混杂作用影响后,积极应对与伤害无统计学关联,中度消极应对者发生伤害的危险性是高度消极应对者的0.77倍(IRR=0.77,95%CI: 0.63~0.94)。结论 消极应对是影响中小学生伤害的危险因素。改善应对模式、促进人格发展是针对中小学生的心理干预措施。
英文摘要:
      ObjectiveMethods Through cluster sampling methods,all students from 3 to 9 grades in 5 primary schools and 3 middle schools in Changfeng county of Anhui province were investigated with questionnaire.All participants completed an anonymous questionnaire concerning their experiences with injuries during the 12 months preceding the survey.The ways of coping to injuries were evaluated by Trait Coping Style Questionnaire.Factors associated with injuries were identified using a negative binomial regression analysis.Results Of 2917 students,the annual event-based rate of injuries was 17.4 per 100 students.Positive coping score had no significant differences between the injury and non-injury groups (33.98± 6.38 vs.33.66±6.37) (t=0.979,P=0.328).The score of negative coping style was higher in injury group than in non-injury group (27.65±7.79 vs.26.54±7.62) (t=2.775,P=0.006).Statistically,the annual injury rates were significantly different in three groups on their negative styles of coping (x2Conclusion Negative waysofcoping was an important risk factor for injuries.Data from our research suggested that psychological preventive measure need to be taken to improve the style of coping.It was also important to promote the related personality development in planning the strategies for future prevention on injuries.
查看全文   Html全文     查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭