Comparative stress levels among residents in three Chinese provincial capitals, 2001 and 2008

PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048971. Epub 2012 Nov 12.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare stress levels among residents in large Chinese cities between 2001 and 2008.

Methods: Survey data were collected in three mainland Chinese capital cities in two waves, in 2001 and 2008, respectively. Participants were recruited through a multi-stage stratified sampling process. Stress was assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale, Chinese version (CPSS). Descriptive methods were used to estimate mean stress levels and associated 95% confidence intervals. Estimates were adjusted by post-stratification weights.

Results: Indicating stable stress levels, respective adjusted mean stress scores for the combined samples of study participants were 23.90 (95%CI: 23.68-24.12) in 2001 and 23.69 (95%CI: 23.38-24.01) in 2008. A lower stress level in 2008 than in 2001 manifested among residents who were under 25 years of age; female; with a college or higher level education; divorced, widowed, or separated; members of the managerial and clerical group; students or army personnel; or with an annual income of at least 30,000 RMB.

Conclusion: The overall stress level did not change among the combined sample of residents in the three Chinese study cities between 2001 and 2008. However, levels remained high and varied across social strata, and may have reflected a national trend among urban residents. Findings indicate a need for a new health policy, and call for the design and implementation of evidence-based interventions that target the highest-risk groups.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Asian People*
  • China
  • Cities*
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Stress, Psychological*
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

This study was funded by the World Health Organization (WHO) (WP/2002/IC/TFI/2.2/001/03.02.AW.03) and the National Social Science Foundation of China (01BSH030). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.