دانلود مقاله سلامت روان نوجوانان، ارتباط، و نحوه آموزش مدرسه در طول COVID-19
چکیده
روش ها
نتایج
بحث
منابع تامین مالی
مشارکت های نویسنده
منابع
Abstract
Methods
Results
Discussion
Funding Sources
Author Contributions
References
چکیده
مواد و روش ها
نظرسنجی تجربیات کووید به صورت آنلاین یا تلفنی از اکتبر تا نوامبر 2020 در نوجوانان 13 تا 19 ساله با استفاده از پنل AmeriSpeak مرکز تحقیقات افکار ملی، یک پنل مبتنی بر احتمال که با استفاده از نمونه گیری مبتنی بر آدرس تصادفی با پیگیری بدون پاسخ نامه و تلفن به کار گرفته شده بود، انجام شد. نمونه نهایی شامل 567 نوجوان در کلاس های 7 تا 12 بود که آموزش مجازی، حضوری یا ترکیبی دریافت کردند. ارتباط تنظیم نشده و تعدیل شده بین چهار پیامد سلامت روان و نحوه آموزش اندازه‌گیری شد، و مشارکت ها با ارتباط مدرسه و خانواده برای اثرات محافظتی مورد بررسی قرار گرفت.
نتایج
دانش‌آموزانی که به صورت مجازی به مدرسه می‌رفتند سلامت روانی ضعیف‌تری نسبت به دانش‌آموزانی که حضوری می‌رفتند گزارش کردند. نوجوانانی که آموزش مجازی دریافت می‌کنند، روزهای ناسالم روانی بیشتر، علائم افسردگی پایدارتر و احتمال بیشتری برای تفکر جدی برای اقدام به خودکشی نسبت به دانش‌آموزان در سایر روش‌های آموزشی گزارش کردند. پس از اصلاحات جمعیت شناختی، ارتباط مدرسه و خانواده هر کدام ارتباط بین آموزش مجازی در مقابل آموزش حضوری را برای هر چهار شاخص سلامت روان کاهش داد.
نتیجه
همانطور که فرض شد، نحوه آموزش مدرسه با پیامدهای سلامت روان مرتبط بود، به طوری که نوجوانانی که آموزش حضوری دریافت می کردند کمترین شیوع شاخص های منفی سلامت روان را گزارش کردند. ارتباط مدرسه و خانواده ممکن است نقش مهمی در حفظ نتایج منفی سلامت روان داشته باشد.
توجه! این متن ترجمه ماشینی بوده و توسط مترجمین ای ترجمه، ترجمه نشده است.
Abstract
Background
Because COVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020, nearly 93% of U.S. students engaged in some distance learning. These school disruptions may negatively influence adolescent mental health. Protective factors, like feeling connected to family or school may demonstrate a buffering effect, potentially moderating negative mental health outcomes. The purpose of the study is to test our hypothesis that mode of school instruction influences mental health and determine if school and family connectedness attenuates these relationships.
Methods
The COVID Experiences Survey was administered online or via telephone from October to November 2020 in adolescents ages 13–19 using National Opinion Research Center’s AmeriSpeak Panel, a probability-based panel recruited using random address–based sampling with mail and telephone nonresponse follow-up. The final sample included 567 adolescents in grades 7–12 who received virtual, in-person, or combined instruction. Unadjusted and adjusted associations among four mental health outcomes and instruction mode were measured, and associations with school and family connectedness were explored for protective effects.
Results
Students attending school virtually reported poorer mental health than students attending in-person. Adolescents receiving virtual instruction reported more mentally unhealthy days, more persistent symptoms of depression, and a greater likelihood of seriously considering attempting suicide than students in other modes of instruction. After demographic adjustments school and family connectedness each mitigated the association between virtual versus in-person instruction for all four mental health indicators.
Conclusion
As hypothesized, mode of school instruction was associated with mental health outcomes, with adolescents receiving in-person instruction reporting the lowest prevalence of negative mental health indicators. School and family connectedness may play a critical role in buffering negative mental health outcomes.
Measures
Four indicators of mental health challenges were assessed: (1) stress levels in four areas (at school, home, work, and with friends) given response options low/moderate/high/very high; responses were coded for high or very high stress in at least one area (hereafter “high/very high stress”); (2) mental health-related quality of life, assessed by number of the past 14 days (response options: 0, 1 or 2, 3–6, 7–14) with mental health not good, dichotomized with a cutoff score of ≥7 days (hereafter, ≥7 days not good mental health); (3) seriously considering attempting suicide (hereafter, considering suicide) in the past 12 months (response options: yes/no); and (4) persistent symptoms of depression over the past 2 weeks, assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item adolescent [[18]], with students experiencing ≥3 symptoms on more than half of the past 14 days (response options: 0, 1 or 2, 3–6, 7–14) considered to have persistent symptoms of depression (hereafter, persistent symptoms of depression). Links to mental health resources and a toll-free national suicide prevention hotline were provided to all respondents.
Scales were used to assess both school connectedness and family connectedness. School connectedness was measured using the six questions from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health’s School Connectedness Scale, including items such as “I feel like I am a part of this school” and “The teachers at this school treat students fairly” [[19]]. Standardized Cronbach’s alpha = .89. Family connectedness was measured using responses to five questions assessing parental monitoring, parent–adolescent communication, and emotional support such as “How often do you and a parent/caregiver eat dinner together” and “How comfortable do you feel talking to a parent or caregiver about how you are feeling (for instance, stress, anxiety, and depression)?” The standardized Cronbach’s was alpha = .70. As continuous variables, school connectedness ranged from 6 to 30 and family connectedness ranged from 6 to 20. Low connectedness was defined as at or below the 25th percentile (≤16 for school connectedness and ≤13 for family connectedness).
Results
Within the final sample of 567 adolescents, 460 (80.2%) reported enrollment in public school, 36 (7.1%) in private school, and 69 (12.6%) in some other type of school, for example, a school that is completely online all of the time, regardless of the pandemic. A majority (56.3%) of respondents received virtual instruction; 24.4% received combined instruction and 19.4% received in-person instruction. Virtual instruction was more prevalent among black (68.2%) and Hispanic students (69.0%) compared to white students (48.1%) (Table 1).
All four mental health indicators were associated with mode of instruction (Table 2). Students in virtual learning were more likely than students attending school in-person to report high or very high stress (44.7% vs. 25.0%). Students in virtual learning more frequently reported negative mental health risk on three indicators than students receiving combined or in-person instruction: ≥7 days not good mental health (14.5%, 7.6%, and 3.9%, respectively); considering suicide (13.5%, 8.4%, and 3.8%, respectively); and persistent symptoms of depression (19.1%, 15.3%, and 7.6%, respectively). When continuous variables for school and family connectedness were dichotomized (lowest quartile compared to the three upper quartiles), low school connectedness was more common for students attending virtually than those receiving combined or in-person instruction (34.8%, 19.1%, and 13.3%, respectively) and the association was statistically significant (p = .006). Reported levels of family connectedness did not vary significantly by mode of school instruction (27.4%, 21.2%, 17.6%, respectively) (p = .212).