4.5 Article

Religious attendance and depressive symptoms among community dwelling elderly in Taiwan

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 19, 期 12, 页码 1148-1154

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.1204

关键词

religion; depression; elderly

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The purpose of this study was to investigate the unique association between religious attendance and the prevalence of depressive symptoms among community dwelling elderly persons. Methods Employing a multilevel stratified sampling strategy, a total of 1000 subjects, aged 65-74 and living in Taiwan, were recruited for this interview survey during the year 2001. Aside from background information, the Taiwanese Depression Questionnaire (TDQ) and the Neighborhood Quality Index were used to assess degree of depression and its correlates. Results Altogether, 863 subjects (age, M=69.4, SD=2.7) had complete data for analysis; 215 (24.8%) had had depressive symptoms in the past week. Among them, those who were female, (OR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.59-2.97), illiterate(OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.76-3.33), unemployed (OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.24-2.61), or not married (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.22-2.38), or those who had less family income (OR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.24-2.73), physical illness (OR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.86-3.86), or less social capital (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.88-0.94), were at higher risk of being depressed. Moreover, those (95.2% with religious belief) who had not attended religious activities during the past 6 months were at higher risk of being depressed than those (100% with religious belief) who had (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.41-4.91). Multivariate logistic regression disclosed that those never attending religious activities were 2.70 times more likely to be depressed when compared to those who had, after taking into consideration sociodemographics and social capital. Conclusion The attending of religious activities is a protective factor for geriatric depression. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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