4.2 Article

Gender-specific health behaviors of German university students predict the interest in campus health promotion

期刊

HEALTH PROMOTION INTERNATIONAL
卷 16, 期 2, 页码 145-154

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/heapro/16.2.145

关键词

counseling; health behavior; health promotion; university students

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This cross-sectional study aimed to provide an assessment of the needs for health promotion in university freshmen based on lifestyle variables and the interest in health-promoting activities A questionnaire survey was performed using a sample of 288 male and 362 female university freshmen from 19 to 33 yeats of age. Male students were significantly more likely to engage in drug-taking behaviors, referring to alcohol and cannabis use, and had a higher body mass index. No gender difference was noted in the numbers of regular smokers. Preventive behaviors with respect to healthy nutrition and dental hygiene were reported more often in females, whereas the duration of physical activity per week and the use of condoms with a new sexual partner showed no gender difference. There was a strong demand for group health-oriented programs (79.5% of respondents). Substantial proportions of students had a high interest in individual counseling aiming at stress management (24.5%), healthy nutrition (19.3%) and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases (18.2%). Women expressed a greater interest in most programs than men. Multivariate regression analyses showed that a disposition for alcohol abuse was the strongest predictor of interest in health counseling in male students (p < 0.001), while psychosocial stress was the most important predictor in female students (p < 0.001). From the prevalence of health risks and the students' interest in health promotion programs it was concluded that there is a strong need for health promotion in the university setting in Germany. Results suggested that individuals at risk would probably benefit most from an individual counseling program.

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