• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >The role of unrealistic optimism in explaining preventive behaviors in high versus low endemic malaria settings in Belize.
【24h】

The role of unrealistic optimism in explaining preventive behaviors in high versus low endemic malaria settings in Belize.

机译：不切实际的乐观在解释伯利兹高流行性疟疾和低流行性疟疾的预防行为中的作用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background. Of all the diseases an individual can encounter in the world, malaria is one of the most destructive. Simple measures like sleeping under a bednet would greatly reduce the burden (Abeku, 2007). When people estimate their risk relative to others, they are most often unrealistically optimistic, which may explain why those at risk often fail to perform behaviors, such as using a bednet that will reduce their risk. However, one study showed that people at high risk for malaria held pessimistic perceptions of their risk for the disease, but the reasons for this finding are unclear (Morrison, Ager, & Willock, 1999).;Purpose. In this study I examined risk perceptions about malaria, specifically absolute and comparative risk for the disease, and the role such perceptions play in encouraging or discouraging preventive behavior in areas with high (>50 cases/1,000) and low (1 case/1,000) rates of endemic malaria. In addition, I tested the accuracy hypothesis (Brewer, Cuite, Herrington, & Weinstein, 2004) between perceived risk of malaria and engaging in the preventive behavior of using a bednet.;Method. This study used a cross-sectional, non-equivalent group comparison observational design and was conducted in Belize, Central America. The data were collected using both self-reported surveys and personal interviews from residents of 20 selected villages across the country with high (n = 10 villages) and low (n = 10 villages) endemic malaria. A minimum of 15 people per village were recruited, for a total sample size of 300 people, with approximately equal numbers of males and females. The survey assessed absolute and comparative risk perceptions, based on the recommendations by Brewer et al., as well as perceived control and risk behaviors related to malaria, and standard demographics.;Results. More people in the high risk area had ever had malaria compared to those in the low risk area (42.7% vs. 8.8%, p.001). Average perceived risk of ever getting malaria was 48.4%, with no significant difference between the high (51%) and low (46%) areas; however, those in the high area who had ever had malaria reported a significantly higher risk of ever getting malaria in the future (mean=59% vs. 45% chance, p=.003), indicating a fairly accurate perception among those in the high risk area but pessimism among those in the low risk area. However, participants in both high and low risk areas were most likely to show an optimistic bias for comparative risk items. When compared to others in their town, 47.1% thought they were below average, 32.5% average, and 20.3% above average risk (with no differences between high and low areas). Bednet use varied, with 40.7% of those in the high, and only 2.0% of those in the low, risk area always using a bednet (p.001); those who had a history of malaria in the high risk area were more likely to always use a bednet than those who have no history of malaria (50.0% vs. 33.7%, p.05). There was no evidence for the accuracy hypothesis: greater perceived risk regarding malaria was not associated with regular bednet usage. However, perceived control was significantly correlated with preventive behavior (r=0.236, p0.001).;Conclusions. These results show both pessimistic and optimistic biases regarding risk of malaria, depending on the type of risk assessed (absolute vs. comparative risk), actual risk of malaria (high vs. low risk areas), and perceptions of control. However, risk perceptions regarding malaria were not reliably associated with preventive behavior, unlike that found by other researchers, although it is unclear why this is so. Future studies should be longitudinal in nature, to determine if risk perceptions and perceived control are related to future behavior. These studies must use standardized measures of risk perceptions to adequately examine risk-behavior hypotheses.
机译：背景。在一个人可能遇到的所有疾病中，疟疾是最具破坏性的疾病之一。简单的措施，例如在蚊帐下睡觉，将大大减轻负担（Abeku，2007年）。当人们估计自己相对于其他人的风险时，他们通常会不切实际地乐观，这可以解释为什么有风险的人经常不进行某些行为，例如使用降低其风险的蚊帐。但是，一项研究表明，疟疾高危人群对其疾病风险持悲观看法，但是这一发现的原因尚不清楚（Morrison，Ager和Willock，1999）。在这项研究中，我研究了对疟疾的风险认知，特别是对疾病的绝对风险和相对风险，以及在高（> 50例/ 1,000）和低（<1例/ 1,000）地区，这种认知在鼓励或阻止预防行为中的作用。 ）的地方性疟疾发病率。此外，我测试了在感知的疟疾风险与参与使用蚊帐的预防行为之间的准确性假设（Brewer，Cuite，Herrington和Weinstein，2004年）。这项研究使用了横断面，非当量的组比较观察设计，并在中美洲伯利兹进行。数据是使用自我报告的调查和个人访谈收集的，这些信息来自全国20个选定村的地方性疟疾流行率高（n = 10个村庄）和低（n = 10个村庄）。每个村庄至少招募15个人，样本总数为300人，男女人数大致相等。该调查根据Brewer等人的建议评估了绝对风险风险和比较风险风险，以及与疟疾和标准人口统计学有关的感知控制和风险行为;结果。与低风险地区的人相比，高风险地区的人患疟疾的比例更高（42.7％vs. 8.8％，p <.001）。患疟疾的平均感知风险为48.4％，高（51％）和低（46％）地区之间无显着差异；然而，那些曾经患过疟疾的高海拔地区的人报告说，将来患疟疾的风险要高得多（平均值= 59％，相对于45％的机会，p = .003），这表明在那些疟疾高发地区中，人们有一个相当准确的看法。高风险地区，但在低风险地区则悲观。但是，高风险和低风险领域的参与者最有可能对比较风险项目表现出乐观的偏见。与镇上的其他人相比，有47.1％的人认为他们的风险低于平均水平，32.5％的平均风险和20.3％的平均风险高于平均风险（高低地区之间没有差异）。蚊帐的使用情况各不相同，在高风险地区，有40.7％的蚊帐始终使用蚊帐（p <.001）；在处于低风险地区的只有2.0％。与那些没有疟疾史的人相比，那些在高危地区有疟疾史的人比那些没有疟疾史的人更倾向于经常使用蚊帐（50.0％对33.7％，p <.05）。没有关于准确性假说的证据：关于疟疾的更大感知风险与经常使用蚊帐无关。然而，知觉控制与预防行为显着相关（r = 0.236，p <0.001）。这些结果表明，根据评估的风险类型（绝对风险与比较风险），疟疾的实际风险（高风险地区与低风险地区）以及对控制的看法，对疟疾风险既有悲观也有乐观偏见。然而，与其他研究者不同，关于疟疾的风险感知与预防行为并不可靠相关，尽管目前尚不清楚为什么如此。未来的研究应该是纵向的，以确定风险感知和感知控制是否与未来行为有关。这些研究必须使用风险感知的标准化度量来充分检查风险行为假设。

著录项

  • 作者

    Handysides, Daniel G.;

  • 作者单位

    Loma Linda University.;

  • 授予单位 Loma Linda University.;
  • 学科 Health Sciences Public Health.;Psychology Behavioral Sciences.;Education Health.
  • 学位 Dr.P.H.
  • 年度 2010
  • 页码 130 p.
  • 总页数 130
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号