↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between weight status and health-related quality of life in Chinese primary school children in Guangzhou: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relationship between weight status and health-related quality of life in Chinese primary school children in Guangzhou: a cross-sectional study
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0567-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wei Liu, Rong Lin, Weijia Liu, Zhongshan Guo, Lihua Xiong, Bai Li, K. K. Cheng, Peymane Adab, Miranda Pallan

Abstract

To investigate the association between weight status and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among pupils in Guangzhou, China. The study comprised 5781 children aged 8-12 years from 29 schools. Height and weight were objectively measured using standardized methods, and BMI z-score derived using the age and sex specific WHO reference 2007 for 5-19 years. Weight status was classified as underweight (<-2SD), healthy weight (between -2SD and 1SD), overweight/obesity (>1SD). HRQOL was measured by the self-report version of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0. After controlling for gender, age, school type, parental education, and family income, HRQOL scores were significantly lower in overweight/obese compared with healthy weight children only in the social functioning domain (β = -1.93, p = 0.001). Compared with healthy weight children, underweight children had significantly lower total (β = -1.47, p = 0.05) and physical summary scores (β = -2.18, p = 0.02). Subgroup analysis for gender indicated that compared to healthy weight, total (β = -1.96, p = 0.02), psychosocial (β = -2.40, p = 0.01), social functioning (β = -3.36, p = 0.001), and school functioning (β = -2.19, p = 0.03) scores were lower in overweight/obese girls, but not boys. On the other hand, being underweight was associated with lower physical functioning (β = -2.27, p = 0.047) in girls, and lower social functioning (β = -3.63, p = 0.01) in boys. The associations were mainly observed in children aged 10 and over, but were not significant in younger children. Children from private schools had generally lower HRQOL compared to those in public schools, but the associations with weight status were similar in both groups. The relationship between overweight/obesity and HRQOL in children in China is not as prominent as that seen in children in western or high-income countries. However, there appears to be gender and age differences, with more of an impact of overweight on HRQOL in girls and older children compared with boys and younger children. Underweight is also associated with lower HRQOL. Future intervention to prevent both obesity and undernutrition may have a positive impact on the HRQOL in children in China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 135 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 23 17%
Student > Master 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Researcher 8 6%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 49 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 12%
Psychology 11 8%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 55 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2016.
All research outputs
#17,828,338
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,469
of 2,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,723
of 416,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#16
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.