A major strength of this study lies in the use of multilevel techniques to estimate the mental health effects of community building practice among middle-aged and older adults from 96 communities in current China, by adjusting the effects of individual social background and social ties and support. However, our
Finding should be considered in light of the following limitations. First, our sample only came from two provinces in current China that are at the extremes of two different economic vitalities: rich and poor.
Stratified analysis of separate province may be more telling on specific details. Moreover, the CHARLS 2008 pilot survey required that only the targeted respondents aged 45 or older can answer the survey questions related to health behaviors and no proxy respondents were allowed to answer these questions. Thus a large number of cases with missing information on health related questions have been excluded from the analysis. Caution, therefore, is needed to generalize our findings. In addition, this study is limited in gaging more information related to community characteristics. Some community-level variables such as education and having health insurance were not included in this study with the consideration that education and health insurance programs
operate differently across regions and across urban and rural areas in China ( Zimmer et al., 2010). Future research may include the other community characteristics to examine whether and how the other community characteristics may moderate the health effects of community building strategies in China. Another limitation in
this study is the negative skewness of the distribution of the summed score of mental health (skewness¼ 1.053, SE¼.055;Kurtosi¼.536, SE¼.110). Evenwithout being indicated as a severe skewness, and the modeling of the transformed mental health score gave very similar results, skewness of the dependent variable still warrants caution when generalizing the results from the current study.
A major strength of this study lies in the use of multilevel techniques to estimate the mental health effects of community building practice among middle-aged and older adults from 96 communities in current China, by adjusting the effects of individual social background and social ties and support. However, ourFinding should be considered in light of the following limitations. First, our sample only came from two provinces in current China that are at the extremes of two different economic vitalities: rich and poor.Stratified analysis of separate province may be more telling on specific details. Moreover, the CHARLS 2008 pilot survey required that only the targeted respondents aged 45 or older can answer the survey questions related to health behaviors and no proxy respondents were allowed to answer these questions. Thus a large number of cases with missing information on health related questions have been excluded from the analysis. Caution, therefore, is needed to generalize our findings. In addition, this study is limited in gaging more information related to community characteristics. Some community-level variables such as education and having health insurance were not included in this study with the consideration that education and health insurance programsoperate differently across regions and across urban and rural areas in China ( Zimmer et al., 2010). Future research may include the other community characteristics to examine whether and how the other community characteristics may moderate the health effects of community building strategies in China. Another limitation inthis study is the negative skewness of the distribution of the summed score of mental health (skewness¼ 1.053, SE¼.055;Kurtosi¼.536, SE¼.110). Evenwithout being indicated as a severe skewness, and the modeling of the transformed mental health score gave very similar results, skewness of the dependent variable still warrants caution when generalizing the results from the current study.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..