4.2 Article

Correlates of Psychological Distress Among Filipino Americans and Filipinos Living in Urban Areas in the United States and the Philippines

期刊

JOURNAL OF TRANSCULTURAL NURSING
卷 34, 期 4, 页码 256-262

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/10436596231159004

关键词

psychiatric; mental health; clinical areas; psychological distress; correlational design; research methods; migration

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the levels of psychological distress, sources of stress, and use of health-promotion strategies between Filipino Americans and Filipinos. The results showed that Filipino Americans reported lower levels of psychological distress compared to Filipinos, who experienced distress mainly related to employment and finances.
Introduction: Many Asian immigrants, including Filipino Americans (FilAms), experience psychological distress (PD) due to the challenges in adjusting to their new country and culture. This descriptive comparative study aimed to compare FilAms and Filipinos concerning their levels of PD, sources of stress, and use of health-promotion strategies. Methods: Data from 89 FilAms and 95 Filipinos living in urban cities, obtained from the I-HELP-FILIPINOS database, measuring cardiometabolic risks, mental health, and environmental stressors in 2017, including PD, were examined. Results: The mean age of all participants (N = 184) was 44.2 +/- 22.8 years old. Both groups rated their health as good to excellent, although Filipinos were significantly more likely to be distressed (p < .001). Filipinos were also more likely to ascribe stress to employment (48.3% vs. 68.2%, p =.006) and finances (28.1% vs. 52.6%, p <.001) than FilAms. Discussion: While both groups shared comparative perspectives on health, FilAms reported lower PD than Filipinos. The most significant source of stress was the country of residence. We recommend tailoring interventions to each local context's unique social and environmental circumstances.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据