| 万方君,辛正,周琳,白莉,王永明,谷少华,刘守钦,李萌萌,桑少伟,张济,刘起勇.济南城市中心区和边缘区居民高温健康脆弱性比较研究[J].中华流行病学杂志,2014,35(6):669-674 |
| 济南城市中心区和边缘区居民高温健康脆弱性比较研究 |
| Heat vulnerability assessment in Jinan city：a comparison between residents living in urban centers and urban-fringe areas |
| 收稿日期:2013-11-16 出版日期:2014-09-02 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 高温 脆弱性 城市中心区 城市边缘区 |
| 英文关键词: Heat Vulnerability Urban center Urban-fringe |
| 基金项目:国家重大科学研究计划（973 计划）（2012CB955504） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 3010 |
| 全文下载次数: 1126 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 比较济南城市中心区和边缘区居民高温健康脆弱性特征的差异，为制定适应措施提供科学依据。方法 利用多阶段分层抽样方法在济南市环城高速内抽取8 个社区（村）（中心区和边缘区），再采用偶遇抽样抽取≥16 岁居民共801 人，使用自行设计的调查问卷进行横断面调查，收集两地区居民有关高温健康脆弱性的健康医疗、社会联系、认知行为、经济情况、生活资源、居住环境及工作环境7 个维度的23 个指标数据，采用等权加和方法计算各维度评分（评分范围为0～1，越接近1 表示脆弱性越大）。结果 济南城市边缘区居民有关高温健康脆弱性的认知行为、经济情况、生活资源和工作环境4 个维度评分分别为0.42、0.63、0.55 和0.62，高于城市中心区居民的0.41、0.51、0.26 和0.41;城市中心区居民在居住环境、社会联系和健康医疗维度评分分别为0.57、0.49 和0.31，高于城市边缘区居民的0.50、0.46 和0.25。表明中心区居民对居住环境、健康医疗状况和社会联系维度脆弱性较高，边缘区居民对高温认知行为、经济情况、生活资源和工作环境则较为欠缺，差异均有统计学意义。结论 在小范围地理尺度内（城市中心区和边缘区）居民的高温健康脆弱性特征具有差异，因此在制定高温适应措施时应更具区域针对性。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To find out the differences in regional characteristics of heat vulnerability between people living in urban centers and urban-fringe areas of Jinan city so as to provide basis for the development of adaptation measures to heat. Methods A cross-sectional survey on heat vulnerability was conducted in urban center and urban-fringe areas of Jinan city，using a self-designed questionnaire among 801 residents at the age of 16 years or older in August 2013. Data of 23 indicators related to heat vulnerability were collected and aggregated to 7 dimensions：health and medical insurance，social networks，heat perception and adaptive behavior，economic status，resources， living environment and working environment. An index score was calculated using a balanced weighted average approach for each dimension，ranging from 0 to 1，with the closer to 1 as greater vulnerability. Results The scores on heat perception and adaptive behavior，economic status， resources and working environment dimensions for urban-fringe areas were 0.42，0.63，0.55 and 0.62， statistically significantly higher than the urban center area of 0.41，0.51，0.26 and 0.41. Scores of living environment，social networks and health/medical insurance dimensions for urban center area were 0.57，0.49 and 0.31，which were all higher than the urban-fringe areas of 0.50，0.46 and 0.25， with differences statistically significant. Conclusion Residents living in the urban center might be more vulnerable to heat in terms of living environment，health/medical insurance and social networks while residents living in the urban-fringe areas might more be vulnerable in terms of heat perception and adaptive behavior，economic status，life resources and working environment. These facts indicated that heat vulnerability among residents could be quite different，even at a fine geographic sale. We would thus suggest that intervention strategies on protecting people from heat，should be more targeted. |
|
查看全文
Html全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
