本文選題：兒童忽視 + 隨訪研究��； 參考：《安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的探析安徽省長豐縣某農(nóng)村地區(qū)兒童忽視的縱向發(fā)展趨勢,闡述不同人口學(xué)特征分組的兒童(如不同性別、是否有兄弟姐妹、父母是否離婚、不同留守狀態(tài)等)忽視的特點(diǎn)和在隨訪中的變化趨勢;對兒童忽視的影響因素進(jìn)行分析,以此為兒童忽視的預(yù)防和干預(yù)提供根據(jù)。方法本課題組以安徽省長豐縣的某農(nóng)村地區(qū)為研究現(xiàn)場,采用整群抽樣的方法抽取長豐縣該農(nóng)村地區(qū)的5所小學(xué)和3所初中,在所抽取的學(xué)校中將全部3-9年級的學(xué)生納入基線調(diào)查時(shí)的對象,于2009年12月使用課題組的自編問卷對調(diào)查對象進(jìn)行調(diào)查。以基線調(diào)查時(shí)的3、4和7年級學(xué)生進(jìn)行隨訪調(diào)查的對象,使用與基線調(diào)查時(shí)相同的問卷,在2010年12月和2011年12月各隨訪一次。采用廣義估計(jì)方程模型的方法探析兒童忽視的影響因素。結(jié)果本次隨訪研究表明兒童忽視的檢出率分別為67.8%,56.6%和57.7%,三次調(diào)查忽視檢出率的差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。在隨訪調(diào)查中,有33.3%(272/816)的研究對象一直處于忽視狀態(tài),有12.9%(105/816)的兒童在隨訪調(diào)查中均未檢出忽視,基線調(diào)查時(shí)檢出忽視的553人中有106人(19.2%)在隨訪中未檢出忽視,在基線時(shí)未檢出忽視的263人中有158人(60.1%)在隨訪過程中檢出忽視。男性和女性兒童忽視檢出率的差異只在基線調(diào)查時(shí)有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,女生的忽視檢出率低于男生;三次調(diào)查中,忽視組和非忽視組兒童年齡分布的差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義;是否為獨(dú)生子女的兒童忽視檢出率的差異在隨訪調(diào)查時(shí)均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,有兄弟姐妹的兒童忽視檢出率高于獨(dú)生子女兒童;除第一次隨訪調(diào)查外,父母離婚的兒童與父母未離婚的兒童之間忽視的檢出率有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異,父母離婚的兒童忽視的檢出率高于父母未離婚的兒童;留守兒童忽視的檢出率高于非留守兒童,且在兩次的隨訪調(diào)查中都有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異。廣義估計(jì)方程模型的結(jié)果表明,年齡大、生活質(zhì)量高、積極的應(yīng)對方式是兒童忽視的保護(hù)因素,男性、有兄弟姐妹、父母離婚、留守、家庭功能重度障礙、消極應(yīng)對方式是兒童忽視的危險(xiǎn)因素。而在家庭人均年收入、焦慮、抑郁、自尊方面,未觀察到與兒童忽視之間存在關(guān)聯(lián)。結(jié)論本研究表明安徽省長豐縣農(nóng)村兒童的忽視檢出率呈下降趨勢,不同亞組的兒童忽視檢出率在隨訪過程中呈現(xiàn)不同的特征,兒童忽視與兒童的性別、年齡、有兄弟姐妹、父母離婚、留守、家庭功能、生活質(zhì)量、應(yīng)對方式等因素有關(guān)。家庭、學(xué)校、社會(huì)等應(yīng)當(dāng)采取措施,預(yù)防和降低兒童忽視的發(fā)生,使兒童健康成長。
[Abstract]:Objective to explore the longitudinal development trend of neglect of children in a rural area of Changfeng County, Anhui Province, and to explain whether children with different demographic characteristics (such as different genders, brothers and sisters, parents divorced or not) have different demographic characteristics. In order to provide basis for prevention and intervention of child neglect, the characteristics of neglect and the tendency of change in follow-up were analyzed, and the influencing factors of child neglect were analyzed in order to provide evidence for prevention and intervention of child neglect. Methods A rural area in Changfeng County of Anhui Province was used as the research site. Five primary schools and three junior middle schools in Changfeng County were selected by cluster sampling. In the selected schools, all the students in grades 3-9 were included in the baseline survey. In December 2009, the self-designed questionnaire of the research group was used to investigate the subjects. Using the same questionnaire as the baseline survey students in grade 3 and grade 7 were followed up in December 2010 and December 2011 respectively. The influence factors of child neglect were analyzed by using the generalized estimation equation model. Results this follow-up study showed that the detection rate of children neglect was 67.8% and 57.6% respectively. There was significant difference in the detection rate of neglect among the three surveys. In the follow-up survey, 33. 3 / 272 / 816) of the subjects were in a state of neglect, 12. 9 / 105 / 816 of the children were not found to be neglected in the follow-up survey, and 106 of the 553 people who were found to have been neglected in the baseline survey were not found to have been neglected during the follow-up. Of 263 people who did not detect neglect at baseline, 158 were found to be neglected during follow-up. The difference of the prevalence rate of neglect between male and female children was statistically significant only in baseline survey, and the prevalence rate of neglect in girls was lower than that in boys, and there was no significant difference in the age distribution of children between neglect group and non-neglect group in three surveys. The difference in the prevalence of neglect among children with only child was statistically significant at the time of follow-up, and the prevalence rate of neglect in children with siblings was higher than that in children with only one child; except for the first follow-up survey, There was statistical difference between the children whose parents divorced and the children whose parents were not divorced. The rate of neglect of children divorced by parents was higher than that of children without divorce, and the rate of neglect of children left behind was higher than that of children who were not left behind. There were statistical differences in the two follow-up surveys. The results of the generalized estimation equation model show that older age, higher quality of life, positive coping style are the protective factors that children neglect, male, siblings, parents divorce, stay behind, family dysfunction, Negative coping style is the risk factor of children's neglect. No association was observed between annual income, anxiety, depression, and self-esteem. Conclusion this study shows that the prevalence rate of neglect among rural children in Changfeng County of Anhui Province is decreasing. The prevalence rate of child neglect in different subgroups shows different characteristics during follow-up. Children neglect and children's sex, age, brothers and sisters have different characteristics. Parents divorce, stay behind, family function, quality of life, coping style and other factors. Family, school, society and so on should take measures to prevent and reduce the occurrence of child neglect, so that children grow up healthily.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：C913.5

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 潘建平,李玉鳳;兒童忽視研究的最新進(jìn)展[J];中華流行病學(xué)雜志;2005年05期

2 潘建平;;兒童忽視的分類和表現(xiàn)以及預(yù)防工作進(jìn)展[J];中國全科醫(yī)學(xué);2007年03期

3 劉春玲;張旭琪;;論兒童忽視評估中的困難[J];青少年犯罪問題;2008年04期

4 趙曼;;兒童忽視的評估研究述評[J];社會(huì)心理科學(xué);2010年Z2期

5 王曉芬;解讀兒童忽視[J];教育導(dǎo)刊.幼兒教育;2005年08期

6 李金霞;劉愛書;楊迪;;國外兒童忽視研究現(xiàn)狀及發(fā)展趨勢探析[J];教育導(dǎo)刊(下半月);2013年05期

7 潘建平,楊子尼,任旭紅,王桂香,王惠珊,席衛(wèi)平,潘玉泉,馬葆靖,石淑華,弋花妮,傅平,古桂雄,靜進(jìn),俞紅,李瓊昭,李威,喻貴清,馬西,武雅俐,黎海芪;中國部分城市3～6歲兒童忽視狀況及影響因素分析[J];中華流行病學(xué)雜志;2005年04期

8 李玉鳳,潘建平,馬西,郭彥萍,韓春玲,孫厚榮,王端霄,袁建新,李建榮,汪高芝;陜西省3~6歲城區(qū)兒童忽視影響因素的調(diào)查分析[J];中國全科醫(yī)學(xué);2005年05期

9 花靜;巫瑛;古桂雄;陳軍;朱琳俐;;兒童忽視調(diào)查370例(英文)[J];中國臨床康復(fù);2006年18期

10 潘建平;李玉鳳;;兒童忽視的預(yù)防和干預(yù)[J];中國全科醫(yī)學(xué);2007年03期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前2條

1 楊子尼;潘建平;;《中國3—6歲城市兒童忽視常�！返难兄芠A];新世紀(jì)預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)面臨的挑戰(zhàn)——中華預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)首屆學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)論文摘要集[C];2002年

2 潘建平;張華;李敏;王飛;羅莎莎;曹春紅;張松杰;陳晶琦;張慧穎;王桂香;郭蔚蔚;彭玉林;石淑華;陳光虎;弋花妮;傅平;夏黎;古桂雄;俞紅;陸彪;段志嫻;王應(yīng)雄;鐘朝暉;李建;王琳;;中國城市中小學(xué)生忽視影響因素分析[A];中華預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)兒少衛(wèi)生分會(huì)第九屆學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)、中國教育學(xué)會(huì)體育與衛(wèi)生分會(huì)第一屆學(xué)校衛(wèi)生學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)、中國健康促進(jìn)與教育協(xié)會(huì)學(xué)校分會(huì)第三屆學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)論文集[C];2011年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 三九;兒童忽視讀說易患口吃[N];中國中醫(yī)藥報(bào);2007年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 楊玉玲;淄博市農(nóng)村3～6歲兒童忽視現(xiàn)狀及與意外傷害的關(guān)系[D];河北聯(lián)合大學(xué);2014年

2 湯銀霞;銅陵市城區(qū)學(xué)齡前兒童忽視現(xiàn)況及影響因素研究[D];安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué);2014年

3 李明慧;兒童忽視問題的社會(huì)建構(gòu)[D];首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2016年

4 鐘引;中國西部兩省、市農(nóng)村留守與非留守兒童忽視現(xiàn)狀及影響因素分析[D];重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué);2016年

5 李群英;中國西部兩�。ㄊ校┺r(nóng)村中、小學(xué)生忽視率及其影響因素研究[D];重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué);2016年

6 邢志敏;家庭資本對農(nóng)村兒童忽視影響的一個(gè)實(shí)證研究[D];中國青年政治學(xué)院;2016年

7 梁俊花;中國農(nóng)村地區(qū)兒童忽視量表編制及信效度研究[D];中國青年政治學(xué)院;2011年

8 劉翠霞;武漢市城區(qū)學(xué)齡前兒童忽視現(xiàn)況及影響因素研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2009年

9 杜文冉;唐山市城鄉(xiāng)學(xué)齡前兒童忽視現(xiàn)狀及其影響因素研究[D];河北聯(lián)合大學(xué);2014年

10 劉晨煜;中國西部兩�。ㄊ校q兒童受忽視現(xiàn)狀及影響因素研究[D];重慶醫(yī)科大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：1870078