| Literature DB >> 35672842 |
Xitong Huang1, Minqiang Zhang2,3,4,5, Junyan Fang1, Qing Zeng1, Jinqing Wang1, Jia Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To promote healthy aging, the information about the development of quality of life (QoL) is of great importance. However, the explorations of the heterogeneity in the change of QoL under the Chinese context were limited. This study aimed to identify potential different development patterns of QoL and the influential factors using a longitudinal, nationally representative sample of the Chinese elderly.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese elderly; Chinese longitudinal healthy longevity survey; Growth mixture model; Self-reported overall quality of life
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35672842 PMCID: PMC9175517 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-13314-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 4.135
Fig. 1Structure of the analytic sample
Fig. 2Structural model of the conditional GMM
Descriptive statistics for the analyzed variables
| Analyzed Variables | Mean ( |
|---|---|
| Focal variables | |
| self-reported overall QoL (2002) | 3.67(0.81) |
| self-reported overall QoL (2005) | 3.67(0.81) |
| self-reported overall QoL (2008) | 3.68(0.80) |
| self-reported overall QoL (2011) | 3.74(0.87) |
| self-reported overall QoL (2014) | 3.80(0.83) |
| Basic variables (2002) | |
| Age | 72.73(6.64) |
| Gender, male | 0.47(0.50) |
| Ethnicity, Han | 0.93(0.26) |
| Financial resources, enough | 0.81(0.39) |
| Smoking status, current smoker | 0.25(0.43) |
| Drinking status, current drinker | 0.25(0.43) |
| Dietary variables (2002) | |
| Eat fresh fruit | 0.79(0.41) |
| Eat meat | 0.85(0.36) |
| Eat fish | 0.74(0.44) |
| Eat eggs | 0.86(0.35) |
| Drink tea | 0.53(0.50) |
| Functional variables (2002) | |
| Bathing disability | 0.03(0.17) |
| Dressing disability | 0.01(0.09) |
| Toileting disability | 0.01(0.08) |
| Transferring disability | 0.00(0.07) |
| Continence disability | 0.00(0.06) |
| Feeding disability | 0.00(0.07) |
| Behavioral variables (2002) | |
| Do physical labor regularly | 0.85(0.35) |
| Do housework | 0.87(0.34) |
| Read newspapers/books | 0.27(0.45) |
| Watch TV or listen to the radio | 0.84(0.37) |
| Take part in some social activities | 0.21(0.41) |
Fitted indices for GMMs with 1 to 4 classes
| Number of Classes | AIC | BIC | SABIC | Entropy | Lo-Mendell-Rubin LRT | Lo-Mendell-Rubin Adjusted LRT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 19,643.55 | 19,697.61 | 19,665.84 | – | – | – |
| 2 | 19,324.69 | 19,513.88 | 19,402.69 | 0.65 | vs 1 35.81*** | vs 1 366.88*** |
| 3 | 19,238.99 | 19,563.32 | 19,372.71 | 0.89 | vs 2 246.73* | vs 2 223.99* |
| 4 | 19,235.89 | 19,695.36 | 19,425.33 | 0.85 | vs 3 49.01*** | vs 3 48.82*** |
AIC Akaike’s Information Criterion, BIC Bayesian Information Criterion, SABIC Sample-size Adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion, Lo-Mendell-Rubin LRT Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio test, Lo-Mendell-Rubin Adjusted LRT Lo-Mendell-Rubin Adjusted Likelihood Ratio Test
*p < 0.05
**p < 0.01
***p < 0.001
Fig. 3Development trends of self-reported overall QoL
The impact of covariates on the development trends of self-reported overall QoL in the 3-class solution
| Covariates | High-level Steady Group | Mid-level Steady Group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |
| Reference: the Low-level Growth Group | ||||
| Basic variables (2002) | ||||
| Age | 1.02 | (0.99–1.05) | 0.99 | (0.97–1.01) |
| Gender, male | 2.84*** | (2.02–3.98) | 0.73 | (0.57–1.94) |
| Ethnicity, Han | 3.21** | (1.44–7.16) | 1.10 | (0.70–1.72) |
| Financial resources, enough | 1103.03*** | (152.00–8004.62) | 81.25*** | (54.68–120.74) |
| Smoking status, current smoker | 0.78 | (0.55–1.12) | 0.63 | (0.48–1.44) |
| Drinking status, current drinker | 1.52 | (1.07–2.17) | 0.97 | (0.72–1.29) |
| Dietary variables (2002) | ||||
| Eat fresh fruit | 23.31*** | (12.82–42.37) | 6.30*** | (4.78–8.30) |
| Eat meat | 4.44*** | (2.67–7.38) | 2.16*** | (1.59–2.91) |
| Eat fish | 6.02*** | (3.80–9.55) | 1.69*** | (1.30–2.19) |
| Eat eggs | 2.83*** | (1.75–4.57) | 1.91*** | (1.39–2.63) |
| Drink tea | 2.20*** | (1.59–3.05) | 1.68*** | (1.30–2.16) |
| Functional variables (2002) | ||||
| Bathing disability | 1.98 | (0.48–2.65) | 1.10 | (0.36–3.37) |
| Dressing disability | 0.33 | (0.07–1.59) | 0.13** | (0.03–0.51) |
| Toileting disability | 0.77 | (0.13–4.65) | 0.52 | (0.12–2.19) |
| Transferring disability | 0.58 | (0.11–3.17) | 0.08* | (0.01–0.70) |
| Continence disability | – | – | – | – |
| Feeding disability | 0.77 | (0.13–4.65) | 0.21 | (0.04–1.25) |
| Behavioral variables (2002) | ||||
| Do physical labor regularly | 0.12*** | (0.07–0.19) | 0.71 | (0.45–1.12) |
| Do housework | 0.23*** | (0.15–0.36) | 1.09 | (0.72–1.67) |
| Read newspapers/books | 23.05*** | (14.97–35.50) | 1.69** | (1.17–2.45) |
| Watch TV or listen to the radio | 11.17*** | (5.51–22.68) | 1.96*** | (1.46–2.63) |
| Take part in some social activities | 25.29*** | (15.97–40.08) | 1.28 | (0.83–1.96) |
All the elderly did not exhibit continence disability
OR odds ratio, 95% CI 95% Confidence Interval
*p < 0.05
**p < 0.01
***p < 0.001