欧洲公共卫生杂志，2002年；12：104-109
父母对儿童独立户外活动的许可
对伤害预防的影响
h.sooori，r.s.bhopal*
背景：父母监督是与儿童伤害有关的一个重要因素。 然而，很少有研究；孩子们认为他们被允许或他们的父母允许他们做什么户外活动；父母关于孩子能做活动的年龄的想法，以及他们允许孩子做活动的年龄。 这项研究描述了儿童放学后独立的户外活动，比较了年龄组（5岁和3岁）、男孩和女孩，以及社会经济状况越差越好。 方法：采用问卷调查的方法，对英国纽卡斯尔市的九所小学的476名7岁和9岁的儿童和471名家长进行调查。 结果：儿童报告说，他们被允许进行许多户外活动，如骑自行车（78.8%)、玩耍(78.6%)和街头轮滑(62.7%）。 年龄较大的儿童、男孩和社会经济条件较差的儿童的父母比他们的比较小组更有可能允许儿童独立地进行户外活动。 34%的9岁儿童被允许在没有成人的情况下过马路，而7岁儿童中只有8。 大多数情况下，男孩的父母和社会经济贫困的儿童，被感知的儿童可以做户外活动，比女孩的父母小一点，社会经济状况更好。 结论：儿童和家长重视和支持儿童独立的户外活动。 儿童和父母对哪些活动是允许的以及他们对儿童独立活动的适当年龄的判断的不同，可能在一定程度上突出了伤害模式中按性别、年龄和社会经济地位的差异。
关键词：儿童，伤害，户外活动，父母许可，父母监督
与儿童伤害有关的最重要因素之一是父母的监督。1 为了那些活动
儿童难以应付，如过繁忙的道路，父母允许儿童独立可能会增加受伤的风险。 虽然环境改善可以是预防伤害的主要部分，但有时也无法替代适当的父母监督。2,3 为了帮助理解目前允许的儿童独立活动水平，本研究描述了不同群体的儿童在没有成人的情况下被允许做什么，父母允许或限制儿童独立户外活动的原因，以及父母对儿童在没有成人监督的情况下能够做一些户外活动的最小年龄的想法。
方法
这项对儿童及其父母的横断面调查旨在探讨城市社会经济贫困地区而不是贫困地区的差异。 所选择的剥夺措施是等级地位
*H.Soori1，R.S.Bhopal2
- 伊朗阿瓦兹大学社区医学系
- 英国爱丁堡大学社区卫生科学系
通信：Hamid Soori博士，艾华兹医学大学流行病学高级讲师，P.O。 方框61355-45，伊朗Ahwaz，
基于汤森评分4 学校所在的地方政府地区(病房。 这一分数背后的方法和理由已经发表，并被广泛使用。4 评分依据的是病房级人口普查数据中经济活动人口失业比例，不居住在私人家庭，居住在缺少汽车的家庭，居住在每个房间一个人以上的家庭。 加权和标准化分数被称为Z分，这些分数从负8到8，平均值为零。 得分越低，社会经济剥夺就越大。 在前北部地区卫生局地区的678个病房已经排名。4 这项研究的目标群体是1994年在泰恩镇纽卡斯尔的小学三年级和五年级（大约七岁和九岁的孩子）学习的儿童及其父母。 根据一项试点研究得出的样本量计算，目标样本量为450名小学生。 首先，与学校警察联络官协商，在社会经济条件越来越差的地区确定了15所合适的学校。 从这份名单中，使用随机数字，在较贫困地区的五所小学（剥夺等级为240、267、288、357、611）和在较贫困地区的四所学校
选择了地区(剥夺等级为3、5、42、67。 在贫困程度较低的地区选择了一所额外的学校，因为试点研究表明，富裕地区上学的儿童多于富裕地区上学的儿童。 九个选定的学校位于整个城市。在那里
104
于2020年10月17日从杭州师范大学用户https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/12/2/104/477185下载
电话。 986113363312，传真 986113361544，电子邮件：hsoori@yahoo.com
学校一年有一个以上的班级，学生人数最接近25人的班级被选中。 平均每个班有26名学生，抽样476人。
一个人的剥夺评分由汤森德评分来评估4 根据家庭家庭的邮政编码记录在父母的问卷中，或当它丢失时，如在学校记录中。 Z分小于样本中值（ 0.85）的家庭被认为是社会经济剥夺的，而Z分高于中位数的家庭被认为不是社会经济剥夺的。
问卷是与家长和教师协商制定的，并对30名儿童进行了试点。 儿童问题单于1994年9月自行完成。 总共有22个问题。 为了使它具有吸引力和易于回答，它包括一些卡通，图纸和简单的问题，例如，在一些问题中，儿童被要求在图片上粘贴不同的（是/否）贴纸。 一个问题要求孩子们用“是”/“否”标签来说明他们是否被允许做十项活动，第二个问题是他们认为放学后应该允许他们做什么户外活动。 （调查问卷可根据相应作者的要求查阅。） 虽然这是一份自我完成问卷，但成人课堂监督（教师、学校警察联络官或研究助理）可以澄清问题，并确保儿童不会对答案进行讨论。
孩子们从学校到家里从班主任和家长的自我完成问卷中拿出一封信，并把完成的问卷带回学校。 还通过儿童发送提醒函。 父母的问卷与他们孩子的问卷有相同的识别号。 这份问卷有52个问题，其中5个是封闭式问题
父母对儿童户外活动的许可如下：（一)父母允许儿童在视野之外玩耍的原因；(二)是否允许儿童从事12项规定的活动；(三)不允许儿童单独上学或放学的原因；(四)父母认为儿童可以从事8项户外活动的年龄；(五）父母允许其子女在没有成人监督的情况下从事10项活动的年龄。
数据用SPSSfor Windows版本进行分析
6.0. 除非另有说明，比较的是男孩与女孩、年龄较大的（5级，约9岁)与年龄较小的(3级，约7岁），以及使用汤森德评分中位数的社会经济剥夺较少的群体。 卡方检验评估了分类数据与未配对t检验之间的关联，连续数据和正态分布数据之间的差异。5 采用多变量Logistic回归模型，对不同社会经济领域的特定学校类别进行聚类效应调整。 p值lt;0.05被认为具有统计学意义，并计算了它们各自95%置信区间的优势比。
结果
答复率
在选定的476名学生（三年级244名，五年级232名)中，471名(98.9%）完成了问卷调查。 在发给父母的471份问卷中，416份（88.3%）已经完成。
儿童
表1显示，儿童认为他们可以进行广泛的户外活动，包括独自玩耍、过街、上学和放学、在没有成人的情况下穿过繁忙的道路、轮滑和骑自行车。 年龄较大的儿童与年龄较小的儿童相比，男孩与女孩相比，更有可能报告被允许从事许多此类活动。 两者之间没有什么区别
表1儿童的答复：儿童认为他们被允许单独做什么，按年龄、性别和剥夺情况分列（数字为百分比）
社会经济
年龄 95%的CI
|
7 |
9 |
差异 |
孩子们 |
女孩 |
差异 |
少一点 |
更多 |
差异 |
(95%Ci) |
|
|
循环 |
74.8 |
86.0 |
0.04 – 0.18 |
83.7 |
76.4 |
0.01 – 0.15 |
79.8 |
80.3 |
–0.08 – 0.07 |
378 (77–84) |
|
玩 |
73.6 |
86.5 |
0.06 – 0.20 |
84.5 |
74.5 |
0.03 – 0.17 |
79.0 |
80.7 |
–0.09 – 0.06 |
376 (76–83) |
|
溜冰鞋 |
60.7 |
71.6 |
0.02 – 0.19 |
56.2 |
77.3 |
0.13 – 0.29 |
62.2 |
69.1 |
–0.16 – 0.02 |
311 (62–70) |
|
穿过他们的街道 |
54.1 |
77.3 |
0.15 – 0.32 |
72.1 |
57.7 |
0.06 – 0.23 |
67.8 |
62.2 |
–0.03 – 0.14 |
308 (61–69) |
|
爬树 |
55.0 |
55.9 |
–0.08 – 0.09 |
67.3 |
41.8 |
0.17 – 0.34 |
56.7 |
53.2 |
–0.06 – 0.13 |
261 (51–60) |
|
离他们的街道更远 |
40.9 |
63.3 |
0.14 – 0.31 |
56.6 |
46.4 |
0.01 – 0.19 |
53.2 |
49.4 |
–0.05 – 0.13 |
244 (47–56) |
|
去操场/公园 |
36.0 |
49.3 |
0.04 – 0.22 |
46.6 |
37.7 |
–0.01 – 0.18 |
36.9 |
47.6 |
0.02 – 0.19 |
200 (38–47) |
|
去学校上学 |
17.4 |
48.5 |
0.23 – 0.39 |
39.0 |
25.0 |
0.06 – 0.17 |
24.9 |
39.5 |
0.06 – 0.23 |
153 (28–37) |
|
穿过一条繁忙的道路 |
15.7 |
42.4 |
0.19 – 0.34 |
34.3 |
22.3 |
0.04 – 0.20 |
26.6 |
30.0 |
–0.12 – 0.05 |
135 (25–32) |
|
爬上建筑物 |
12.4 |
16.2 |
–0.10 – 0.03 |
20.3 |
7.3 |
0.07 – 0.19 |
10.7 |
17.2 |
0.01 – 0.13 |
67 (11–17) |
|
共计 |
242 |
229 |
251<!-- 剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 2002; 12: 104–109 Parental permission for childrenrsquo;s independent outdoor activities Implications for injury prevention H. SOORI, R.S. BHOPAL * Background: Parental supervision is an important factor related to childhood injuries. However, little research has been done on; what outdoor activities children believe they are allowed or their parents allow them to do; parentsrsquo; ideas about the age children can do activities, and the age they would allow their children to do them. This study described childrenrsquo;s independent outdoor activities after-school, comparing age groups (school year 5 and 3), boys with girls, and the less socio-economically well off with the better off. Methods: A cross-sectional study using questionnaires completed by 476 children aged seven and nine years and 471 parents in nine primary schools in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England. Results: Children reported they were permitted many outdoor activities such as cycling (78.8%), playing (78.6%) and roller skating in the street (62.7%). Parents of older children, boys, and more socio-economically deprived children were more likely than their comparison groups to allow children to do outdoor activities independently e.g. 34% of 9-year-olds were allowed to cross a road without an adult compared with 8% of 7-year-olds. Mostly, parents of boys and socio-economically deprived children, perceived children can do outdoor activities slightly younger than parents of girls and the socio-economically better off. Conclusion: Children and parents value and support childrenrsquo;s independent outdoor activity. Differences in childrenrsquo;s and parentsrsquo; understanding of what activities are permissible and in their judgements about the appropriate age for childrenrsquo;s independent activities, may partly underline variations by sex, age and socio-economic status in injury patterns. Keywords: children, injury, outdoor activity, parental permission, parental supervision One of the most important factors related to childhood injuries is parental supervision.1 For activities that children have difficulty in coping with, like crossing a busy road, parental permission for childrenrsquo;s in- dependence might increase the risk of injuries. Although environmental improvements can be a major part of injury prevention, sometimes there is no substitute for appropriate parental supervision.2,3 To help understand the currently permitted levels of childrenrsquo;s independent activity, this study describes what different groups of children were allowed to do without an adult, parentsrsquo; reasons for permitting or restricting childrenrsquo;s in- dependent outdoor activities, and parentsrsquo; ideas about the youngest age that children are able to do some outdoor activities without adult supervision. METHODS This cross-sectional survey of children and their parents was designed to explore differences in socio-economically deprived and not so deprived areas of the city. The selected measure of deprivation was the rank position * H. Soori1, R.S. Bhopal2
Correspondence: Dr Hamid Soori, Senior lecturer of Epidemiology, Ahwaz University of Medical Sciences, P.O. Box 61355–45, Ahwaz, Iran, based on Townsend Score4 of the local government area (ward) in which the school was located. The methods and rationale behind this score have been published, and it is widely used.4 The score is based on ward level census data on the proportion of the economically active population unemployed, not living in private households, living in a household lacking a car, and living in a home with more than one person per room. The weighted and standardized scores are known as Z-scores and these range from minus 8 to 8, with the mean being zero. The lower the score the greater the socio-economic deprivation. The 678 wards in the area of the ex-Northern Regional Health Authority have been ranked.4 The target groups for the study were children studying in 1994 in primary school years three and five (children aged approximately seven and nine years) in Newcastle upon Tyne, and their parents. Target sample size, based on sample size calculations derived from a pilot study, was 450 pupils. First, in consultation with school police liaison officers, 15 suitable schools were identified in more and less socio-economically deprived areas. From this list, using random numbers, five primary schools in less deprived areas (deprivation rank of 240, 267, 288, 357, 611) and four schools in more deprived areas (deprivation ranks of 3, 5, 42, 67) were selected. One extra school was chosen in a less deprived area because the pilot study showed that more children travel to schools in the affluent areas than vice versa. The nine 104 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/12/2/104/477185 by Hangzhou Normal University user on 17 October 2020 tel. 98 611 3363312, fax 98 611 3361544, e-mail: hsoori@yahoo.com chosen schools were located across the city. Where a school had more than one class in a year the class with the number of pupils closest to 25 was chosen. On average there were 26 pupils in each class, giving a sample of 476 individuals. The deprivation score of an individual was assessed by Townsend Score4 of the household based on the family householdrsquo;s postcode as recorded in the parentrsquo;s questionnaires, or when this was missing, as in the school records. Households with a Z-score less than the median of our sample ( 0.85) were considered socio- economically deprived, while those with Z-score above the median were considered not socio-economically d 剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料 资料编号：[269158]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word |
课题毕业论文、文献综述、任务书、外文翻译、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
