4.2 Article

Sleep quality of Chinese adolescents: Distribution and its associated factors

Journal

JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRICS AND CHILD HEALTH
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 138-145

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2011.02065.x

Keywords

distribution; related factors; sleep quality

Categories

Funding

  1. American Health Promotion Association [95-623]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: To investigate the sleep quality status and its associated factors (including psychological and physiological as well as social demographic factors) among Chinese mainland adolescents. Methods: Ten schools, including junior schools, senior schools and universities of Hefei (the capital of Anhui Province in China), were randomly selected. By using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Self-Rated Health Measurement Scale Version 1.0, University of California, Los Angeles, Loneliness Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Self-rating Anxiety Scale and a demographic survey, a cross-sectional study was implemented to 5226 students of the selected schools to investigate the adolescents' sleep quality, self-rated health, psychological status and demographic variables. Results: There were significant sleep quality differences between different groups of grade level, residence, family type, self-report personality, self-report examination scores, self-rated health, depression, loneliness and anxiety according to the results of the univariate analysis (P < 0.01 or < 0.05). The multivariate analysis indicated that high grade level (OR = 1.490, 95% CI = 1.350-1.645), living in rural areas (OR = 0.874, 95% CI = 0.799-0.956), poor self-rated health (OR = 0.934, 95% CI = 0.926-0.942), high degree of depression (OR = 1.867, 95% CI = 1.514-2.302) and anxiety (OR = 1.976, 95% CI = 1.647-2.372) may be the influencing factors of poor sleep. Conclusions: The poor sleep quality of many adolescents may be attributed to various causes, especially psychological reasons.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available