Risk perception of COVID-19 among college students in China: Latent profile analysis.

Juanjuan Ren, Zhenxiang Zhang, Yongxia Mei, Wenna Wang, Qianqian Sun, Mingxu Wang, Zhaozhao Hui
Author Information
  1. Juanjuan Ren: School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
  2. Zhenxiang Zhang: School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
  3. Yongxia Mei: School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
  4. Wenna Wang: School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
  5. Qianqian Sun: School of Nursing and Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
  6. Mingxu Wang: College of Public Health, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xian, China.
  7. Zhaozhao Hui: College of Public Health, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xian, China.

Abstract

Background: The outbreak of the new coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on people's mental and physical health. Meanwhile, people's perceptions of risk may influence their emotional states and preventative behavior during an epidemic. Previous research have revealed the diversity and uniqueness of risk perception, and college students may have a different perspective on risk perception. The objective of this study was to describe the subtypes of risk perception for COVID-19 among college students in China, identify the subtypes' traits, and investigate their affecting variables.
Methods: College students from 10 Chinese provinces participated in a cross-sectional study ( = 2,000) that from January 16 to 30, 2022. The latent profiles and influencing factors for risk perception were investigated using latent profile analysis, one-way analysis of variance, and multinomial logistical regression.
Results: The sample group of this survey was 1,946 students, and the response rate was 97.3%. The best model was suggested to consist of three profiles: "neutral risk perception" (20.3%), "perception seriously without susceptible" (52.8%), and "low risk perception" (26.9%). Risk perception of COVID-19 was positively associated with attention to negation information ( = 0.372, < 0.01), anxiety ( = 0.232, < 0.01), and depression ( = 0.241, < 0.01), and negatively associated with perceived social support ( = -0.151, < 0.01). Logistic-regressions analyses mainly revealed that the risk perception of three profiles related to having chronic diseases ( = 2.704, < 0.01), medical major ( = 0.595, < 0.01; = 0.614, < 0.05), without having COVID-19 confirmed cases around ( = 0.539, < 0.01), attention to negative information ( = 1.073, < 0.001; = 1.092, < 0.001), and perceived social support ( = 0.0.975, < 0.01).
Conclusions: The level of risk perception for COVID-19 among Chinese college students was unsatisfactory, and the risk perception of COVID-19 had significant group characteristics and heterogeneity. Colleges and public health practitioners could have a theoretical and empirical basis to implement risk perception intervention efforts by identifying latent subgroups during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Keywords

References

  1. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jan 19;18(2): [PMID: 33478172]
  2. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2022 Jan 10;:1-4 [PMID: 35000664]
  3. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014 Sep-Oct;36(5):539-44 [PMID: 25023953]
  4. Front Public Health. 2022 Feb 10;9:829589 [PMID: 35223765]
  5. Death Stud. 2021 Nov 29;:1-11 [PMID: 34842068]
  6. Psychol Aging. 2017 Sep;32(6):543-556 [PMID: 28891668]
  7. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2022 Apr 15;73:102871 [PMID: 35261877]
  8. Health Psychol. 2007 Mar;26(2):136-45 [PMID: 17385964]
  9. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7 [PMID: 16717171]
  10. Front Psychol. 2021 Jan 13;11:577331 [PMID: 33519593]
  11. Risk Anal. 2016 Jun;36(6):1079-89 [PMID: 26660724]
  12. Front Psychiatry. 2022 Feb 04;12:767189 [PMID: 35185635]
  13. Front Public Health. 2022 Apr 11;10:873022 [PMID: 35480574]
  14. PLoS One. 2020 Aug 13;15(8):e0237626 [PMID: 32790791]
  15. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2021 Jul;61:102373 [PMID: 34079690]
  16. J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jan 29;23(1):e23126 [PMID: 33439853]
  17. J Affect Disord. 2020 Dec 1;277:75-84 [PMID: 32799107]
  18. J Affect Disord. 2021 Apr 1;284:247-255 [PMID: 33602537]
  19. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021 May 07;14:1843-1853 [PMID: 33994815]
  20. Curr Psychol. 2022 Mar 8;:1-8 [PMID: 35283612]
  21. Nurs Outlook. 2021 Jan-Feb;69(1):13-21 [PMID: 32980153]
  22. Struct Equ Modeling. 2014;21(2):263-279 [PMID: 24729675]
  23. Int J Behav Med. 2021 Dec;28(6):801-807 [PMID: 33834368]
  24. Front Public Health. 2021 Feb 15;9:587439 [PMID: 33659231]
  25. Internet Interv. 2020 Dec;22:100350 [PMID: 33072524]
  26. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Jan 12;7(1):e22794 [PMID: 33433397]
  27. Public Health Nutr. 2020 Feb;23(2):243-253 [PMID: 31248470]
  28. Arch Iran Med. 2020 Apr 01;23(4):249-254 [PMID: 32271598]
  29. SN Compr Clin Med. 2020;2(12):2568-2575 [PMID: 33195996]
  30. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Nov 08;15(11): [PMID: 30413074]
  31. PLoS One. 2021 Feb 10;16(2):e0246676 [PMID: 33566824]
  32. J Anxiety Disord. 2020 Apr;71:102207 [PMID: 32145484]
  33. Appetite. 2021 Aug 1;163:105211 [PMID: 33775788]
  34. Pathog Glob Health. 2021 Jun;115(4):250-257 [PMID: 33522450]
  35. Infect Drug Resist. 2021 Mar 11;14:953-961 [PMID: 33737817]
  36. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Feb 06;18(4): [PMID: 33561974]
  37. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2022 Jun 1;13(1):2078563 [PMID: 35695844]
  38. Front Psychiatry. 2021 Nov 10;12:749379 [PMID: 34858227]
  39. J Adv Nurs. 2022 Jun;78(6):1632-1641 [PMID: 34618365]
  40. Child Abuse Negl. 2020 Dec;110(Pt 2):104667 [PMID: 32859393]
  41. Front Public Health. 2021 Oct 28;9:746387 [PMID: 34778180]
  42. Front Public Health. 2022 Feb 03;9:776829 [PMID: 35186866]
  43. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Feb 21;18(4): [PMID: 33669977]
  44. Front Public Health. 2021 Nov 23;9:774572 [PMID: 34888289]
  45. PLoS One. 2022 Jan 21;17(1):e0262161 [PMID: 35061777]
  46. Risk Anal. 2016 Nov;36(11):2158-2186 [PMID: 27043331]
  47. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Oct 20;18(21): [PMID: 34769528]
  48. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 17;18(12): [PMID: 34204231]
  49. Dent J (Basel). 2021 Dec 14;9(12): [PMID: 34940048]
  50. Epilepsy Res. 2016 Feb;120:31-6 [PMID: 26709880]
  51. J Am Coll Health. 2022 Nov-Dec;70(8):2257-2261 [PMID: 33522442]
  52. Psychosom Med. 1987 Jul-Aug;49(4):331-40 [PMID: 3615762]
  53. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021 Nov;28(42):59953-59962 [PMID: 34148194]
  54. Pan Afr Med J. 2020 Jun 11;35(Suppl 2):75 [PMID: 33623599]
  55. Health Educ Q. 1984 Spring;11(1):1-47 [PMID: 6392204]
  56. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 29;17(9): [PMID: 32365710]
  57. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13 [PMID: 11556941]

MeSH Term

Humans
Cross-Sectional Studies
COVID-19
Students
China
Perception

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.00risk=perception<COVID-1901studentscollegelatentanalysisamongprofile1significantpeople'shealthmayepidemicrevealedstudyChinese2profilesgroup3%threeperception"withoutRiskassociatedattentioninformationanxietydepressionperceivedsocialsupport001Background:outbreaknewcoronavirus-2019impactmentalphysicalMeanwhileperceptionsinfluenceemotionalstatespreventativebehaviorPreviousresearchdiversityuniquenessdifferentperspectiveobjectivedescribesubtypesChinaidentifysubtypes'traitsinvestigateaffectingvariablesMethods:College10provincesparticipatedcross-sectional000January16302022influencingfactorsinvestigatedusingone-wayvariancemultinomiallogisticalregressionResults:samplesurvey946responserate97bestmodelsuggestedconsistprofiles:"neutral20"perceptionseriouslysusceptible"528%"low269%positivelynegation372232241negatively-0151Logistic-regressionsanalysesmainlyrelatedchronicdiseases704medicalmajor59561405confirmedcasesaround539negative073092975Conclusions:levelunsatisfactorycharacteristicsheterogeneityCollegespublicpractitionerstheoreticalempiricalbasisimplementinterventioneffortsidentifyingsubgroupsChina:Latent

Similar Articles

Cited By