| Literature DB >> 29246251 |
Yaqin Zhong1,2, Pär Schön3,4, Bo Burström4, Kristina Burström5,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The association between social capital and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has not been thoroughly studied among older persons in rural China, especially among those who were left behind or not. This study investigates the association between social capital and HRQoL and examines possible differences of this association between being left behind or not in rural China.Entities:
Keywords: Health-related quality of life; Left behind; Older people; Rural China; Social capital
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29246251 PMCID: PMC5732484 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-017-0679-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Characteristics of the respondents and problems in EQ-5D dimensions by being left behind and not being left behind (n = 825)
| Variables | Total | Left behind | Not left behind |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 382 (46.3) | 192 (46.3) | 190 (46.3) | 0.982 |
| Female | 443 (53.7) | 223 (53.7) | 220 (53.7) | |
| Age | ||||
| 60-69 | 418 (50.7) | 207 (49.9) | 211 (51.5) | 0.677 |
| 70-79 | 277 (33.6) | 138 (33.3) | 139 (33.9) | |
| 80 and above | 130 (15.8) | 70 (16.9) | 60 (14.6) | |
| Marital status | ||||
| Married | 600 (72.7) | 325 (78.3) | 275 (67.1) | < 0.001 |
| Othersa | 225 (27.3) | 90 (21.7) | 135 (32.9) | |
| Educational level | ||||
| Primary school and above | 445 (53.9) | 216 (52.0) | 229 (55.9) | 0.273 |
| Illiterate | 380 (46.1) | 199 (48.0) | 181 (44.1) | |
| Problems in mobility | ||||
| Yes | 135 (16.4) | 71 (17.1) | 64 (15.6) | 0.561 |
| No | 690 (83.6) | 344 (82.9) | 346 (84.4) | |
| Problems in self-care | ||||
| Yes | 67 (8.1) | 36 (8.7) | 31 (7.6) | 0.558 |
| No | 758 (91.9) | 379 (91.3) | 379 (92.4) | |
| Problems in usual activities | ||||
| Yes | 153 (18.5) | 88 (21.2) | 65 (15.9) | 0.048 |
| No | 672 (81.5) | 327 (78.8) | 345 (84.1) | |
| Problems in pain/discomfort | ||||
| Yes | 353 (42.8) | 189 (45.5) | 164 (40.0) | 0.108 |
| No | 472 (57.2) | 226 (54.5) | 246 (60.0) | |
| Problems in depression/anxiety | ||||
| Yes | 101 (12.2) | 52 (12.5) | 49 (12.0) | 0.800 |
| No | 724 (87.8) | 363 (87.5) | 361 (88.0) | |
arepresents single, widowed and divorced
Factor loadings of social capital measures
| Questions | Factor loading | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social participation | Neighborhood relationship and support | Trust and reciprocity | Personal networks | |
| 1. Do you participate in some organizations? |
| 0.009 | 0.022 | 0.072 |
| 2. How many organizations do you participate in? |
| 0.003 | 0.020 | 0.054 |
| 3. Do you often participate activities in such organizations? |
| 0.011 | 0.044 | 0.102 |
| 4. Do you trust majority villagers in your village? | −0.026 | 0.062 |
| −0.009 |
| 5. Do you trust the leaders in your village? | 0.067 | −0.088 |
| −0.149 |
| 6. Is there anyone who looks after you when you are sick? | 0.015 | 0.279 |
| 0.232 |
| 7. How many relatives do have? | −0.061 | 0.110 | −0.173 |
|
| 8. How many friends do you have? | 0.040 | 0.131 | 0.247 |
|
| 9. What are the occupations of your relatives and friends who have a close relationship with you? | 0.277 | 0.028 | −0.010 |
|
| 10. Is there anyone who takes care of your house when you are absent? | −0.135 |
| 0.027 | 0.195 |
| 11. Do your neighbor help you when you are sick? | 0.014 |
| 0.516 | 0.104 |
| 12. Are you willing to lend some money to your neighbor when they need? | 0.100 |
| 0.442 | 0.011 |
| 13. Do you often chat with your neighbor? | 0.054 |
| 0.022 | 0.039 |
| 14. Do you often visit your neighbor? | 0.049 |
| −0.014 | 0.040 |
Note: bold means these factor loadings are grouped into one dimension
EQ-5D index by categorical variables, stratified by being left behind and not being left behind
| Variables | Left behind | Not left behind | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD |
| Mean | SD |
| |
| Social capitala | ||||||
| High | 0.880 | 0.143 | < 0.001 | 0.885 | 0.135 | 0.162 |
| Low | 0.793 | 0.231 | 0.861 | 0.198 | ||
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 0.886 | 0.144 | 0.004 | 0.888 | 0.152 | 0.269 |
| Female | 0.838 | 0.189 | 0.871 | 0.156 | ||
| Age | ||||||
| 60-69 | 0.869 | 0.179 | < 0.014 | 0.915 | 0.120 | < 0.001 |
| 70-79 | 0.874 | 0.149 | 0.877 | 0.136 | ||
| 80 and above | 0.806 | 0.180 | 0.754 | 0.225 | ||
| Marital status | ||||||
| Married | 0.873 | 0.162 | < 0.004 | 0.903 | 0.136 | < 0.001 |
| Othersb | 0.814 | 0.194 | 0.830 | 0.178 | ||
| Educational level | ||||||
| Primary school and above | 0.887 | 0.139 | 0.001 | 0.905 | 0.140 | < 0.001 |
| Illiterate | 0.831 | 0.196 | 0.846 | 0.166 | ||
athe score of social capital was dichotomized into low (lowest 25% of the sample) and high (>25%) social capital
brepresents single, widowed and divorced
Tobit regression of social capital and EQ-5D index (total sample)
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | |
| Sexa | ||||||
| Female | −0.019 | 0.021 | −0.018 | 0.021 | −0.020 | 0.021 |
| Ageb | ||||||
| 70-79 | −0.019 | 0.022 | −0.023 | 0.021 | −0.016 | 0.022 |
| ≥ 80 | −0.113*** | 0.029 | −0.120*** | 0.028 | −0.111*** | 0.029 |
| Marital statusc | ||||||
| Others | −0.062** | 0.023 | −0.061** | 0.022 | −0.062** | 0.023 |
| Educational leveld | ||||||
| Illiterate | −0.071** | 0.021 | −0.073** | 0.021 | −0.069** | 0.021 |
| Social capitale | ||||||
| Low | −0.055* | 0.022 | −0.013 | 0.031 | ||
| Left behindf | ||||||
| Yes | −0.040* | 0.019 | −0.019 | 0.022 | ||
| Social participationg | ||||||
| Low | −0.009 | 0.023 | ||||
| Neighborhood relationship and supporth | ||||||
| Low | −0.018 | 0.022 | ||||
| Trust and reciprocityi | ||||||
| Low | −0.102*** | 0.022 | ||||
| Personal networksj | ||||||
| Low | 0.035 | 0.023 | ||||
| Social capital*left behind | −0.084* | 0.044 | ||||
| Observations | 825 | 825 | 825 | |||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.110 | 0.134 | 0.115 | |||
aReference: male
bReference: 60-69 years old
cReference: married
dReference: primary school and above
eReference: high social capital
fReference: not left behind
gReference: high social participation
hReference: high neighborhood relationship and support
iReference: high trust and reciprocity
jReference: high personal networks
***p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05
Tobit regression of social capital and HRQoL (subgroup of being left behind and not being left behind)
| Variables | Being left behind | Not being left behind | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |||||||||
| β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | β | SE | |
| Sexa | ||||||||||||||||
| Female | −0.078** | 0.028 | −0.079** | 0.027 | −0.072* | 0.028 | −0.049 | 0.030 | −0.024 | 0.027 | −0.024 | 0.027 | −0.019 | 0.027 | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Ageb | ||||||||||||||||
| 70-79 | 0.005 | 0.031 | 0.013 | 0.031 | 0.018 | 0.031 | 0.021 | 0.031 | −0.076* | 0.030 | −0.076* | 0.030 | −0.058 | 0.030 | −0.054 | 0.030 |
| ≥ 80 | −0.091* | 0.038 | −0.072 | 0.038 | −0.051 | 0.040 | −0.038 | 0.041 | −0.240*** | 0.038 | −0.239*** | 0.038 | −0.206*** | 0.040 | −0.195*** | 0.040 |
| Social capitalc | ||||||||||||||||
| Low | −0.108** | 0.032 | −0.111** | 0.032 | −0.108** | 0.032 | −0.005 | 0.030 | −0.009 | 0.030 | −0.013 | 0.030 | ||||
| Marital statusd | ||||||||||||||||
| Others | −0.053 | 0.035 | −0.051 | 0.035 | −0.074* | 0.030 | −0.059* | 0.030 | ||||||||
| Educational levele | ||||||||||||||||
| Illiterate | 0.055 | 0.030 | −0.081** | 0.029 | ||||||||||||
| Observations | 415 | 415 | 415 | 415 | 410 | 410 | 410 | 410 | ||||||||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.045 | 0.079 | 0.086 | 0.096 | 0.123 | 0.124 | 0.143 | 0.167 | ||||||||
aReference: male
bReference: 60-69 years old
cReference: high social capital
dReference: married
eReference: primary school and above
***p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05