南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现状及其影响因素

doi:10.11852/zgetbjzz2021-1218

中国儿童保健杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (9): 1010-1013.DOI: 10.11852/zgetbjzz2021-1218

南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现状及其影响因素

代倩倩¹, 娄海琴¹, 刘维韦¹, 陈思涵², 单玲玲³, 许占斌³, 张慧颖⁴

1.南通大学附属妇幼保健院群体保健科,江苏南通 226018;
2.南通市卫生高等职业技术学校2016级康复医学专业;
3.南通大学附属妇幼保健院儿童保健科;
4.哈尔滨医科大学公共卫生学院儿少卫生与妇幼保健学教研室

收稿日期:2021-08-11 修回日期:2021-11-23 发布日期:2022-09-07
通讯作者: 张慧颖,E-mail:zhysxj@aliyun.com
作者简介:代倩倩(1991-),女,安徽人,住院医师,研究生学历,主要研究方向为儿童生长发育及其影响因素。
基金资助:
南通市卫生健康委员会青年课题项目(QA2020032)

Current situation and influencing factors of urban preschool children's neglect in Nantong city

DAI Qian-qian^*, LOU Hai-qin, LIU Wei-wei, CHEN Si-han, SHAN Ling-ling, XU Zhan-bin, ZHANG Hui-ying

^*Group Health Care Department, the Affiliated Maternity and Child Health Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu 226018, China

Received:2021-08-11 Revised:2021-11-23 Published:2022-09-07
Contact: ZHANG Hui-ying, E-mail:zhysxj@aliyun.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的了解南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现状,探究其影响因素,为本地区儿童忽视防治提供理论依据。方法 2021年1月采用随机整群抽样的方法,抽取南通市城区9所幼儿园,采用“中国城市3～6岁儿童忽视评价常模”量表对1 141名儿童家长进行问卷调查。结果南通市城区学龄前忽视率为28.6%,忽视度为40.21±6.67。其中男生与女生的忽视率分别为28.0%和29.2%,忽视度分别为40.29±6.54和40.13±6.80,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。不同年龄组别儿童忽视率和忽视度差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。非独生子女忽视率和忽视度均高于独生子女(χ²=6.209,t=3.947,P＜0.05)。家庭月收入越高的儿童忽视率和忽视度均越低(χ²=28.487,F=25.453),Green评分为中等水平的儿童忽视率和忽视度均最低(χ²=11.595,F=17.215),主要照顾人为父母的儿童忽视率和忽视度均低于祖父母/外祖父母(χ²=19.269,F=5.402),差异均具有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析显示:非独生子女受忽视的风险是独生子女的1.338倍;家庭月收入为＜8 000元、8 000～12 000元的儿童忽视风险分别是家庭月收入>12 000元儿童2.183倍、2.016倍;祖父母或外祖父母作为主要照顾人的儿童忽视风险是父母作为主要照顾人的1.979倍(P<0.05)。结论南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现象较为普遍,影响因素较多,需引起重视,亟待采取措施加以改善。

关键词: 学龄前儿童, 忽视, 家庭因素

Abstract: Objective To describe the current situation of urban preschool children's neglect in Nantong city, and to explore its influencing factors, so as to provide theoretical bases for the prevention and treatment of child neglect in this region. Methods Using stratified random cluster sampling method, 9 kindergartens in the urban area of Nantong were selected in January 2021.Totally 1 141 children's parents were investigated with Chinese Urban Children Aged 3 — 6 Years Neglect Evaluation Norm Scale. Results The neglect rate of preschool children in Nantong city was 28.6%, and the neglect degree was 40.21±6.67. The neglect rates of boys and girls were 28.0% and 29.2% respectively, and the neglect degrees were 40.29 ± 6.54 and 40.13 ± 6.80 respectively, the differences were not statistically significant(P＞0.05). There were no significant differences in neglect rate, neglect degree among different age groups(P＞0.05). The neglect rate and neglect degree were higher in non-only child than those of only child(χ²=6.209, t=3.947), lower in higher family monthly income(χ²=28.487, F=25.453), lower in medium socioeconomic status group(χ²=11.595, F=17.215), lower in children whose main caregivers were parents than those of children whose main caregivers grandparents(χ²=19.269, F=5.402), the differences were all statistically significant(P＜0.05). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of neglect in non-only children were 1.338 times higher than only children, the risk of neglect with family monthly income < 8 000 RMB and 8 000 - 12 000 RMB were 2.183 times and 2.016 times respectively higher than that of children with family monthly income>12 000 RMB(P＜0.05). The risk of neglect in children whose main caregivers were grandparents or maternal grandparents were 1.979 times higher than that in childrenwhose parents are the main caregivers(P＜0.05). Conclusion The neglect of preschool children in Nantong city is common, and the influencing factors are complex, which needs to be paid more attention and be improved by effective measures.

Key words: preschool children, child neglect, family factors

中图分类号:

R179

代倩倩, 娄海琴, 刘维韦, 陈思涵, 单玲玲, 许占斌, 张慧颖. 南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现状及其影响因素[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(9): 1010-1013.

DAI Qian-qian, LOU Hai-qin, LIU Wei-wei, CHEN Si-han, SHAN Ling-ling, XU Zhan-bin, ZHANG Hui-ying. Current situation and influencing factors of urban preschool children's neglect in Nantong city[J]. Chinese Journal of Child Health Care, 2022, 30(9): 1010-1013.

参考文献

[1] U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and families, Children's Bureau.Child maltreatment 2019[R]. Washington, 2021.
[2] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preventing child abuse & neglect[R]. Atlanta, Georgia,2020.
[3] Laura B, Martine BP, Rachel Z, et al. Suggestibility in neglected children: The influence of intelligence, language, and socialskills[J]. Child Abuse Negl, 2018, 79: 51-60.
[4] Department of Health, NHS England. Future inmind: Promoting, protecting and improving our children and young people's mental health and wellbeing[R]. Williams Lea, London,2015.
[5] 潘建平, 杨子尼, 任旭红, 等. 中国3~6岁城区儿童忽视常模的研制[J]. 中国公共卫生杂志, 2003, 19(1):33-36.
[6] 翟屹, 夏代提古丽·苏拉衣曼, 李伟荣, 等. 家庭社会经济地位与儿童超重肥胖的关系[J]. 中华预防医学杂志, 2013, 47(10):945-948.
[7] 栾艳, 王毅. 辽阳市宏伟区学龄前儿童忽视状况及其影响因素分析[J]. 中国初级卫生保健, 2015, 29(8):42-44.
[8] 吴萍萍, 董菊, 贺苗, 等. 乌鲁木齐农村3～6岁儿童忽视与行为问题关联[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2020, 41(5):720-723.
[9] Wang LL, Qu GB, Tang X, et al. Child neglect and its association with social living ability: does the resilience attenuate the association?[J]. Psychol Health Med, 2019, 24(5):519-529.
[10] Bick J, Charles AN. Early adverse experiences and the developing brain[J]. Neuropsychopharmacology, 2016, 41(1):177-196.
[11] 李南, 费忠化, 梁艳, 等. 鲁西南地区二孩家庭学龄前儿童忽视现状及影响因素[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2019, 40(9):1330-1332, 1336.
[12] 吴瑞, 陈佳, 陆玲, 等. 学龄前儿童家庭社会经济地位与父母教养方式的关系[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2020, 41(1):117-119.
[13] Tipper A. Economic models of the family and the relationship between economic status and health[J]. Soc Sci Med, 2010, 70(10):1567-1573.
[14] Jung JH, Kwak YH. Physical health and emotional and behavioral problems in maltreated children according to family economic status: Health problems of maltreated children in Korea[J].Medicine(Baltimore), 2021, 100(13):e25228.
[15] Conrad-Hiebner A, Byram E. The temporal impact of economic insecurity on child maltreatment: A systematic review[J]. Trauma Violence Abuse, 2020, 21(1):157-178.
[16] 王玲玲. 安徽省部分农村地区学龄前儿童忽视状况及其影响因素研究[D]. 合肥:安徽医科大学. 2019.
[17] Crouch E, Probst JC, Radcliff E, et al. Prevalence of adverse childhood experiences(ACEs) among US children[J]. Child Abuse Negl, 2019, 92: 209-218.
[18] 张月芳, 王伟, 朱亚宁, 等. 隔代抚养对婴幼儿体格及神经心理发育的影响[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2015, 23(10):1044-1046.
[19] 邓长明, 陈光虎, 石淑华. 隔代带养儿童心理行为问题对比分析[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2003, 17(3):196.

南通市城区学龄前儿童忽视现状及其影响因素

Current situation and influencing factors of urban preschool children's neglect in Nantong city

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	刘敏, 张倩, 杨亭, 陈洁, 陈立, 代英, 贾飞勇, 武丽杰, 郝燕, 李玲, 张婕, 柯晓燕, 衣明纪, 洪琦, 陈津津, 方拴锋, 王益超, 王琦, 金春华, 李廷玉. 全国多中心学龄前儿童血清叶酸现况调查[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(7): 713-717.
[2]	田甜, 宋佳, 李婧, 袁慧, 沈蒙蒙, 丁蓉, 朱小华, 徐鸿泽, 胡幼芳. 江苏省“二胎”学龄前儿童家庭养育环境与行为问题分析[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(6): 623-628.
[3]	张红, 汪馨垚, 姚春花, 叶孙岳. 学龄前儿童居家户外活动时间的影响因素[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(5): 481-485.
[4]	曾红玲, 周怡, 谢俊, 戴利莎, 汤珺. 基于结构化教学法的小组训练对学龄前孤独谱系障碍儿童的疗效分析[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(5): 564-569.
[5]	刘维韦, 娄海琴, 付路, 代倩倩. 学龄前超重肥胖儿童生存质量现状及影响因素分析[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(4): 385-389.
[6]	马晨欢, 姜莲, 储莉婷, 潘丽珠, 朱佩滢, 王瑜. COVID-19疫情期间居家隔离对上海市学龄前儿童心理健康状况的影响[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(3): 327-331.
[7]	黄琦, 黄欣欣, 钱沁芳, 王章琼, 李国凯. 注意缺陷多动障碍共患发育性协调障碍的学龄前儿童智力结构特征[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(2): 136-140.
[8]	米腊腊, 张淑一, 张敏, 吴依然, 解军. 应用末梢全血干血斑评估学龄前儿童维生素A营养状况的可靠性研究[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2023, 31(1): 37-41.
[9]	王安运, 刘之宸, 范静怡. 学龄前孤独症谱系障碍儿童情绪行为问题与饮食行为问题调查[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(9): 1019-1023.
[10]	雷军, 周小燕, 何建勇, 金海菊, 刘丽芳, 叶飘. 丽水市城区学龄前儿童体重指数与体质健康的相关性研究[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(9): 1033-1036.
[11]	倪波, 肖绪武, 孙瑾, 姜琳, 马莉, 胡丹, 刘学梅, 刘晓婵. 家庭沙盘游戏治疗儿童分离性焦虑障碍的效果分析[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(8): 924-928.
[12]	卢晓哲, 李卫芹, 乔毅娟, 张涛, 冷俊宏. 天津市5~6岁儿童空腹血糖现状及影响因素分析[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(7): 715-719.
[13]	王健. 身体活动与学龄前儿童早期发展[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(6): 585-590.
[14]	牛玉硕, 冉霓, 胡晓雯, 李葵南, 杨秀玲. 学龄前儿童功能性便秘风险预测模型的构建[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(6): 612-616.
[15]	马颖, 焦婷, 黄亚深, 舒冠瑜, 宋燕燕, 蒋琳. 学龄前儿童屏幕暴露对睡眠的影响及户外活动的调节作用[J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2022, 30(6): 664-668.