↓ Skip to main content

Health promoting lifestyles and influencing factors among empty nesters and non-empty nesters in Taiyuan, China: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Health promoting lifestyles and influencing factors among empty nesters and non-empty nesters in Taiyuan, China: a cross-sectional study
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12955-018-0936-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chichen Zhang, Ruifang Zhu, Jiao Lu, Yaqing Xue, Lihong Hou, Mimi Li, Xiao Zheng, Tingzhong Yang, Jianzhong Zheng

Abstract

In China, the problems of population aging and empty nesting have become important issues which will affect the social stability and economic development. The aim of this study was to explore the health promoting lifestyles and influencing factors among empty nesters and compare with non-empty nesters to find out their differences, so as to provide a scientific evidence for people to formulate health management strategies for elderly. A cross-sectional survey which used a stratified random cluster sampling method, was conducted among 500 elders in six districts of Taiyuan, China, there were 288 empty nesters and 212 non-empty nesters. The general information and health- promoting lifestyles were investigated by using the self-made General Information Questionnaire and Health Promoting Lifestyle Scale(HPLP). Two-sample t-test and Chi-square test were used to compare the sociodemographic factors, HPLP scores of empty nesters to non-empty nesters; Multiple stepwise linear regression was performed to estimate influencing factors related to the HPLP of empty nesters and non-empty nesters. The current findings showed that there were differences between the empty nesters and non-empty nesters in gender, resident, marital status, education and income, self-care ability, source of income, relationship with spouse and social activities (P < 0.05). Empty nesters were mostly male, married, had a higher education level, self-care ability and income and lived in urban compared with non-empty nesters. The health promoting lifestyles of the elderly in this survey were in the medium level, the highest score for all dimensions in both groups was in nutrition, whereas health responsibility was executed worst. The HPLP and six subscales scores of the empty nesters were higher than non-empty nesters, there were significant differences in total score of HPLP, self-realization and health responsibility (P < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis showed that the main predictive factors for the empty nesters were education, self-care ability and resident, whereas the main predictive factors for the non-empty nesters were parents-child relationship, source of income and age; social activity was the common factor for two group. The health promoting lifestyles of the empty nesters was better than that of the non-empty nesters. Health responsibility, interpersonal relations and stress management were key dimensions to be improved. Except social activity, education, self-care ability and resident were the unique influencing factors of health-promoting lifestyles for empty nesters, while the parents-child relationship, income and age were unique factors for non-empty nesters. The main target of Intervention strategy for elderly health promoting lifestyles should be the enhance of health responsibility, interpersonal relations and stress management by improving social activities, parent-child relationship, education and income of elderly.

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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 25 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Psychology 6 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 6%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 28 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,977,355
of 23,073,835 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#398
of 2,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,718
of 330,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#37
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,073,835 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 330,748 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.