4.5 Article

The effect of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on health-related quality of life in children

期刊

CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW
卷 119, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105595

关键词

Coronavirus; COVID-19; Child; Quality of life; Kid-KINDL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The study was conducted to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on health-related quality of life in children. Materials and methods: The study was conducted with 597 children aged 7-13 and their parents using the online data collection tool via social media. Socio-demographic form and Generic Health-related Quality of Life Questionnaire for Children (Kid-KINDL) were used to collect the data. SPSS 23.0 program, descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis variance analysis were used to evaluate the data. Results: During the pandemic, 41.5% of the parents stated that their child gained weight, tendency to sleep of 34.2% and tendency to use the Internet of 69.3% increased. The average self-reported quality of life score of the children was found to be 73.91 8.44. The self-esteem sub-dimension score of the children whose tendency to sleep increased during the pandemic (p < 0.05); and the physical well-being (p < 0.001), emotional wellbeing (p < 0.001), self-esteem (p < 0.001), family (p < 0.01), school (p < 0.05) sub-dimensions and total (p < 0.05) score averages of the children whose tendency to use the Internet were found to be lower. The emotional well-being, family and friends sub-dimensions as well as total average scores of the children of the parents who feel fear/anxiety about coronavirus becoming a pandemic and who stated that lockdown negatively affected their mental health were found to be lower (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Although self-reported quality of life scores of children were generally good, parents reported that their children gained weight, tendency to sleep and internet use increased during the pandemic.Y

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

4.5
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