• Users Online: 218
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 
Table of Contents
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 249-256

The correlation between family function and health-promoting lifestyle among female adolescents in Iran


1 Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Community Health and Geriatric Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Nursing Care Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Date of Submission18-Aug-2020
Date of Decision01-Nov-2020
Date of Acceptance10-May-2021
Date of Web Publication25-Nov-2021

Correspondence Address:
Shahzad Pashaeypoor
Department of Community Health and Geriatric Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran.
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/nms.nms_71_20

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background: Health-promoting lifestyle (HPL) is a major health concern among adolescents. Family function (FF) has potential effects on adolescents’ lifestyle and health. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between FF and HPL among female adolescents. Methods: This correlational study was conducted from January to February 2020 on 356 female adolescent students randomly recruited through multistage cluster sampling from four public junior high schools in the south of Tehran, Iran in 2020. Data were collected using a personal characteristics questionnaire, the Adolescent Health Promotion Short Form, and the McMaster Family Assessment Device. Data analysis was performed through Pearson’s correlation coefficient, the one-way analysis of variance, the independent-samples t test, and the linear regression analysis. Results: The average age of adolescents was 14.16 ± 0.76 years. The total mean scores of participants’ HPL and FF were 75.36 ± 12.43 (in the possible range of 21–105) and 3.02 ± 0.37 (in the possible range of 1–4), respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between FF and HPL (r = 0.399, P < 0.001). Among demographic characteristics, adequacy of family income, and among dimensions, the problem-solving, behavioral control, roles, and affective involvement dimensions of FF were significant predictors of HPL, explaining 24.5% of its total variance. Conclusion: The mean HPL and FF were greater than the possible median scores. Also, adequacy of family income and FF were significant predictors of HPL among female adolescents. Healthcare authorities and policymakers are recommended to pay greater attention to FF in developing health-promoting programs for adolescents.

Keywords: Adolescent, Family function, Health-promoting lifestyle


How to cite this article:
Sarkhani N, Pashaeypoor S, Haghani S. The correlation between family function and health-promoting lifestyle among female adolescents in Iran. Nurs Midwifery Stud 2021;10:249-56

How to cite this URL:
Sarkhani N, Pashaeypoor S, Haghani S. The correlation between family function and health-promoting lifestyle among female adolescents in Iran. Nurs Midwifery Stud [serial online] 2021 [cited 2022 May 19];10:249-56. Available from: https://www.nmsjournal.com/text.asp?2021/10/4/249/331295




  Introduction Top


Adolescents constitute around one-sixth of the global population.[1] The national census in Iran also revealed that there were 12 million adolescents aged 10–19 years in Iran in 2016.[2] Adolescence is associated with rapid physical and emotional changes and transition from childhood to adulthood.[3] It is the period of forming attitudes and behaviors and thereby, determines lifestyle behaviors in adulthood.[4]

Lifestyle is one of the main factors affecting health in all stages of life. Health-promoting lifestyle (HPL) is considered as the main factor in the prevention of most health-related problems. It consists of six main dimensions, namely nutrition, physical activity, health responsibility, stress management, social support, and life appreciation.[5] Most adolescents have an unhealthy lifestyle and are at risk for developing unhealthy lifestyle behaviors such as immobility, unhealthy eating, cigarette smoking, and alcohol consumption. These behaviors can negatively affect their physical and mental health in adulthood, and thereby negatively affect family and public health.[6],[7],[8]

The term “family” is a societal construct whereby persons are related by ancestry, marriage, adoption, or choice. The adolescents spend more time at family and set family members as role models, then, family is strongly linked to their health and wellbeing.[9],[10] Family functioning is one of the factors with potential effects on adolescents’ HPL. Good family function (FF) can promote the formation of healthy behaviors. FF is the ability of a family to meet the needs of its members by mutual love and support, emotional communication, and sharing life events and stress.[11],[12]

The McMaster Model of FF (MMFF) is one of the most well-known FF-related models. This model focuses on those aspects of FF that have the greatest effects on the physical and emotional health or problems of family members.[13] MMFF states that FF has the following seven main dimensions: problem-solving, communication, roles, affective responsiveness, affective involvement, behavior control, and general functioning.[14]

In families with good FF, individuals have distinct roles, clear relationships, and good effects on each other and can achieve success through the successful performance of their activities. Contrarily, families with poor functioning are disorganized and have weak relational patterns and weak relationships.[15] A study showed that problems in families can be the main cause of failure in social relationships and high-risk behaviors such as alcohol consumption and drug abuse.[16] Accordingly, some studies have compared the health-promoting behaviors and the FF, which shows that this comparison differs in various areas, and some dimensions of HPL are neglected. Fleming Megan’s study showed that FF had significant relationships with some lifestyle behaviors such as physical activity and fruit and vegetable consumption among adolescents.[17] Several other studies also showed that FF had a significant relationship with health-related problems in adolescence such as emotional-behavioral problems,[18] anorexia nervosa,[19] anxiety, and depression.[20]

Although previous studies reported that FF can be a predictor of some health-related outcomes in adolescence, there are limited data about the role of FF dimensions in adolescents’ HPL. Community health nurses, as evaluators, trainers, guides, and referrers, can communicate with families and can take effective measures to improve the level of performance and meet the health-related needs of family members. Moreover, reviewing the literature shows lack of studies related to the relationship between family functioning and HPL. Therefore, we conducted this study to address this gap.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between FF and HPL among female adolescents.


  Methods Top


This correlational study was conducted from January to February 2020. The study population comprised all female adolescent students in public junior high schools in Tehran, Iran. Sampling was done through multistage cluster sampling. Initially, two districts (based on a larger population and demographically diverse) were randomly selected from all 11 districts in the south of Tehran city, and then, two junior high schools were randomly selected from each of these two districts. Three classes were selected from each of the schools through simple random sampling. All eligible students of these 12 classes were recruited for the study. In total, 360 students were assessed for eligibility. Selection criteria were an age of 13–15 years, consent for participation, and living in invulnerable families. Vulnerable families were single-parent, no-parent, step-parent, immigrant families as well as families with addicted or disabled members, and families with physically and mentally ill patients. Participants were excluded if they moved to another school or voluntarily withdrew from the study.

The sample size was determined using the sample size formula for a two-variable correlation (i.e., n=[(Z_(1-α/2)+Z_(1-β))^2/(ω)^2] +3, where Ln〖(1+r)/(1-r)〗) considering the correlation coefficient of 0. 15 between FF and HPL as well as a confidence level of 0.95 and a test power of 80%.[21],[22] Accordingly, 346 students were determined to be necessary for the study. Considering possible attrition of 0.5%, 360 samples were recruited and finally 356 students completed the study questionnaire.

Data collection instruments

Data were collected using a personal characteristics questionnaire, the Adolescent Health Promotion Short Form (AHP-SF), and the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD). The personal characteristics questionnaire consisted of 10 items on age, body mass index, last-semester grade point average, family size, birth order, adequacy of family income, and parents’ educational level and occupation.

AHP-SF was used for HPL assessment. Chen et al.[5] developed this scale in 2014 in Taiwan for high-school students aged 13–19 years. AHP-SF has 21 items in six dimensions, that is, nutrition (three items), social support (four items), health responsibility (four items), life appreciation (four items), physical activity (three items), and stress management (three items). Items are scored on a 5-point scale from 1 (“Never”) to 5 (“Always”). The possible total score of this scale is 21–105, with higher scores representing a healthier lifestyle. Chen et al.[5] reported the acceptable validity and reliability of this scale with a Cronbach α of 0.90. Sharkani et al.[23] reported the acceptable validity and reliability of the Persian AHP-SF with a Cronbach α of 0.83 and a test–retest intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81.

FF was assessed using FAD. Epstein et al.[24] developed this scale in 1983 based on MMFF. FAD has 53 items on organizational, transactional, and structural properties of families and addresses the seven dimensions of FF, namely problem-solving (five items), communication (six items), roles (eight items), affective responsiveness (six items), affective involvement (seven items), behavioral control (nine items), and general functioning (12 items). Item scoring is performed on a four-point scale from 1 (“Completely disagree”) to 4 (“Completely agree”). The total score of the scale is calculated by dividing the sum score of the items by 53 and ranges between 1 and 4. Higher scores show better FF. Epstein et al. reported that the Cronbach α values of FAD dimensions were 0.72–0.92. Zadehmohmmadi and Malekkhosravi[25] reported the acceptable validity and reliability of the Persian FAD with a Cronbach α value and the test–retest intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.90 and 0.81, respectively.

The data collection instruments were distributed among participants to complete them through self-report. The questionnaires were distributed during class time and the researcher was present and provided the participants with the necessary explanations, if needed.

Data analysis

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software program, version 16.0 was used for data analysis. Data were described using the measures of descriptive statistics including frequency, mean and standard deviation. First, the association between the independent variable (FF and characteristics) and the dependent variable (HPL) was examined. Then the dependent variable and dependent variables were entered in the regression model. Pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis was used to determine the correlations among HPL and FF. Also, the same test was used to determine the correlations among HPL and FF and variables such as age and BMI. One-way analysis of variance was used to determine the differences between the mean scores of HPL and FF in terms of variables such as parent’s educational level, birth rank, and adequacy of family income. The independent-samples t test was used to determine the difference between the mean scores of HPL and FF in terms of variables such as parents’ employment status, last-semester grade point average, and family size. The multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine which demographic characteristics and FF dimension score predict HPL. The level of significance was set at less than 0.05.

Ethical considerations

This study has the approval of the Ethics Committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran (code: IR.TUMS.FNM.REC.1398.154). Necessary permissions were obtained from the authorities of the study setting. Participants and their parents were informed of their freedom to withdraw from the study and the confidentiality of their data. Written informed consent was obtained from participants and their parents.


  Results Top


In total, 360 junior-high-school students were included and studied; of these, 356 completed the questionnaire. The mean age of the participants was 14.16 ± 0.76 years. Most of them were the first child of their families (56.3%), lived in families with less than four members (77.5%), [Table 1] shows their characteristics.
Table 1: Participants’ characteristics and their relationships with the mean scores of FF and HPL

Click here to view


The total mean scores of participants’ HPL and FF were 75.36 ± 12.43 (in the possible range of 21–105) and 3.02 ± 0.37 (in the possible range of 1–4), respectively [Table 2]. The results of the independent-samples t test and the one-way analysis of variance illustrated that the mean score of participants’ HPL had a significant relationship with the employment status of their fathers (P = 0.04), adequacy of family income (P = 0.02), and family size (P = 0.03). Moreover, these tests indicated that the mean score of participants’ FF had a significant relationship with their fathers’ educational level (P = 0.02), adequacy of family income (P < 0.001), and last-semester grade point average (P = 0.02) [Table 1].
Table 2: Pairwise correlations between FF and HPL and their dimensions

Click here to view


The Pearson’s correlation analysis revealed that HPL had a significant positive correlation with FF (r = 0.399, P < 0.02). Moreover, pairwise correlations between the dimensions of HPL and the dimensions of FF were significant and positive (P < 0.05), except for the correlation between the communication dimension of FF and the nutrition dimension of HPL and the correlation between the effective involvement dimension of FF and the nutrition, physical activity, and social support dimensions of HPL, which were not statistically significant (P > 0.05; [Table 2]).

The multiple linear regression analysis showed that among demographic characteristics, adequacy of family income, and among dimensions of FF, the problem-solving, roles, affective involvement, and behavioral control were significant predictors of HPL and explained 24.5% of its total variance (R2 = 0.245) [Table 3].
Table 3: The results of the multiple linear regressions for the predictors of HPL

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


The mean score of HPL was greater than the possible median score of HPL (in the possible range of 21–105). The highest dimensional mean score was related to the life appreciation dimension, which is in agreement with the findings of a study on male adolescents in Iran[26] and a study on female and male adolescents in Turkey.[27] The higher score of the life appreciation dimension might be attributable to the fact that adolescents gain many experiences through attending different social occasions and situations, hence have a good appreciation of life. On the contrary, the lower HPL dimensional mean score might be related to the health responsibility dimension. A study on Japanese adolescents[28] and a study on Chinese adults[29] also reported the same finding. Experience of health-related problems are facilitators for the development of health responsibility.[30] Then, the lower score of the health responsibility dimension might be linked to the adolescents’ limited experience of health-related problems.

The mean score of FF in this study was greater than the possible median score of FF (in the possible range of 1–4). The highest and the lowest FF dimensional mean scores were related to the problem-solving and the communication dimensions, respectively. This is in line with the findings of a former study in Iran[20] and contradicts the findings of a study in Thailand, which showed that the highest and the lowest dimensional mean scores were related to the communication and the effective responsiveness dimensions, respectively.[31] This contradiction is attributable to the fact that FF is under the influence of sociocultural factors; hence, it varies in different countries.

The findings of this study also indicated that HPL and its dimensions had significant positive correlations with FF and its dimensions. Moreover, FF and adequacy of family income level were significant predictors of HPL. Most previous studies in this area reported the same findings. For instance, a study on 2793 adolescents in Columbia showed that FF had significant relationships with lifestyle behaviors related to weight management, nutrition, and physical activity among all racial and ethnic groups.[32] Another study reported that FF is a significant determinant of healthy behaviors among adolescents.[17] Several other studies also showed the negative correlation between FF and some aspects of HPL.[33],[34] The differences between the findings may lie in samples, cultural issues, limitations in health equipment and facilities in Iran, lack of time management, differences in the tools used, and lack of attention by people and authorities to the health of adolescents and FF.

The adequacy of family income was the only variable that showed a significant relationship with FF and HPLs. Therefore, the adequacy of family income entered the regression model and the results showed that the HPL of students with relatively sufficient income was better than those with sufficient income. This finding contradicts the findings of studies by Amiri[35] and Nacar.[36] It is clear that families with low-income have more problems in meeting the needs of family members. However, high income may also lead to family problems that affect FF.[36] Unalan et al.[37] in Kayseri observed no relationship between scores of the HPLPS and financial status. However, we can conclude that the adolescent’s opportunities, in a broad sense, may be limited by their parents’ financial resources. So, social and economic factors should be handled together to improve families’ healthy behaviors and functions.

Our findings revealed that FF is a significant factor affecting lifestyle among adolescents. Families with poor FF cannot effectively manage emotional and instrumental problems, do not accurately follow the steps of problem-solving, and cannot effectively fulfill the basic needs of children such as the need for healthy nutrition and a safe living environment.[32] Adolescents are usually seeking autonomy in communications and roles and role model from their parents. Therefore, parents’ adequate knowledge about the negative and positive effects of their behavioral patterns and their effects on adolescents can help them promote their healthy lifestyle.[38] Members in families with good FF provide each other with adequate support and kindness; hence, the family environment turns into a safe place for adolescents to express their problems and concerns, receive adequate attention, and feel worthy.[39] Contrarily, inadequate behavioral control in families prevents the development of health-promoting habits and behaviors such as regular physical activity, health responsibility, and stress management.[34] Overall, families with poor FF have children with unhealthy lifestyle manifested by escaping responsibility toward health, attempts to receive support from people out of the family, limited engagement in physical activity, unhealthy nutrition, and high levels of stress.[17]

This study had some limitations, which limit the generalizability of its findings. The study was conducted only on female adolescents in a city. The samples were also done only in the south of Tehran. Future studies are suggested to replicate this study on larger samples of adolescents from both genders and different areas. Also, it is necessary to study different age groups and compare the results to assess the importance of FF.


  Conclusion Top


This study concludes that HPL and FF are greater than the possible median scores. Also, FF can be a significant predictor of HPL. In families with better FF, problem-solving is performed more effectively, roles and responsibilities are clear and flexible, interpersonal relationships are strong and effective, members effectively communicate their emotions and receive adequate support, and conflicts are clearly communicated and properly managed. The findings of this study can be useful for the managers of the health system, families, health educators, and researchers. Therefore, healthcare authorities and policymakers need to pay greater attention to FF and consider it in their programs for promoting a healthy lifestyle among adolescents.

Acknowledgement

This article is part of our search project approved by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences. The authors would like to thank the research administration of the university, the staff of the study setting, and all students who participated in the study.

Financial support and sponsorship

This work was supported by School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences under grant number 98.02.28.42887.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.


  References Top




 
  References Top

1.
World Health Organization. Adolescent Health. [Online]. Available from: https://www.who.int/health-topics/adolescent-health#tab=tab_2. [Last accessed on 2020 Mar 13].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Statistical Center of Iran. [Online]. Available from: https://www.amar.org.ir/english/Statistics-by-Topic/PopulationAccessed. [Last accessed on 2020 Apr 5].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Stanhope M, Faan RD, Lancaster J, Faan RP. Public Health Nursing E-book: Population-Centered Health Care in the Community. Amsterdam:Elsevier Health Sciences; 2019.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Nies MA, McEwen M. Community/Public Health Nursing-E-Book: Promoting the Health of Populations. Amsterdam:Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Chen MY, Lai LJ, Chen HC, Gaete J. Development and validation of the short-form adolescent health promotion scale. BMC Public Health 2014;14:1106.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Balali Meybodi F, Hasani M, Mehdinejad M. Evaluating health-promoting life style and its related factors among adolescent girls of Kerman in 2015. Health Develop J 2017;6:85-96.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Heshmati H, Alizadeh Sh, Adib-Moghaddam S, Khajavi S, Rafiee N, Behnampour N. Self-care pattern related to life style and its related factors among female high school students in Gorgan in 2013. J Torbat Heydariyeh Univ Med Sci 2014;2:40-48.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Yekefallah L, Vaezi A, Pazokian M, Yekefallah F, Samieefard F. Study of lifestyle and preventive behaviors of osteoporosis among adolescents in Qazvin. J Shahid Sadoughi Univ Med Sci 2012;20:259-68.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Trask BS, Hamon RR. Cultural diversity and families: Expanding perspectives. J Family Commun 2008;8:96-100.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Zhang T, Wang Z. The effects of family functioning and psychological suzhi between school climate and problem behaviors. Front Psychol 2020;11:212.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Sharma R. The family and family structure classification redefined for the current times. J Family Med Prim Care 2013;2:306-10.  Back to cited text no. 11
  [Full text]  
12.
Halliday JA, Palma CL, Mellor D, Green J, Renzaho AM. The relationship between family functioning and child and adolescent overweight and obesity: A systematic review. Int J Obes (Lond) 2014;38:480-93.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Matejevic M, Todorovic J, Jovanovic AD. Patterns of family functioning and dimensions of parenting style. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 2014;141:431-7.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Yoosefi N. An investigation of the psychometric properties of the McMaster clinical rating scale (MCRS). Educ Meas 2012;2:91-120.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Akbari Zardkhaneh S, Mahmoodi M. The efficacy of adolescent development training program to parent on parent-child relationship and family function. J Child Ment Health 2015;2:47-57.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Lima-Serrano M, Guerra-Martín MD, Lima-Rodríguez JS. [Relationship between family functioning and lifestyle in school-age adolescents]. Enferm Clin 2017;27:3-10.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Fleming MS. Associations between family functioning and adolescent health behaviors. 2015. Available from: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/445.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Velders FP, Dieleman G, Henrichs J, Jaddoe VW, Hofman A, Verhulst FC, et al. Prenatal and postnatal psychological symptoms of parents and family functioning: The impact on child emotional and behavioural problems. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2011;20:341-50.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Sim L, Matthews A. The role of maternal illness perceptions in family functioning in adolescent girls with anorexia nervosa. J Child Family Stud 2013;22:541-50.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Amani R. The role of family function in teenagers anxiety and depression. Biannual J Clin Psychol Personal 2016;13:77-84.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Bujang MA, Baharum N. Sample size guideline for correlation analysis. World J Soc Sci Res 2016;3:468-78.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2013.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Sarkhani N, Negarandeh R, Pashaeypoor S. The effects of face-to-face education for student health ambassadors on the health-promoting lifestyle of adolescent female students: A randomized controlled trial. J Public Health2021:1-7.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Epstein NB, Baldwin LM, Bishop DS. The McMaster family assessment device. J Marital Fam Ther 1983;9:171-80.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Zadehmohmmadi A, Malekkhosravi GH. Preliminary study of psychometric properties and validation of the Family Functioning Scale (FAD). J Family Res 2013;2:69-89.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi S, Mirghafourvand M, Tavananezhad N, Karkhaneh M. Health promoting lifestyles and self-efficacy in adolescent boys. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci 2014;23:152-62.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Yesilfidan D, Adana F. The impact of health behaviours development training on healthy lifestyle behaviours amongst adolescents with obesity risk: A school example in a city in western turkey. J Pak Med Assoc 2017;67:1698-703.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Wei CN, Harada K, Ueda K, Fukumoto K, Minamoto K, Ueda A. Assessment of health-promoting lifestyle profile in Japanese university students. Environ Health Prev Med 2012;17:222-7.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Zhang SC, Tao FB, Ueda A, Wei CN, Fang J. The influence of health-promoting lifestyles on the quality of life of retired workers in a medium-sized city of northeastern china. Environ Health Prev Med 2013;18:458-65.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Baheiraei A, Mirghafourvand M, Charandabi SM, Mohammadi E. Facilitators and inhibitors of health-promoting behaviors: The experience of Iranian women of reproductive age. Int J Prev Med 2013;4:929-39.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Louthrenoo O, Aurpibul L, Oberdorfer P, Sirisanthana V. Family functioning in adolescents with perinatal HIV infection. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care 2018;17:2325958218774782.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Berge JM, Wall M, Larson N, Loth KA, Neumark-Sztainer D. Family functioning: Associations with weight status, eating behaviors, and physical activity in adolescents. J Adolesc Health 2013;52:351-7.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Hosseini M, Sarbakhsh P, Mollaei S. The relationship between the family functions and health-promoting behaviors of nursing students in Tehran, Iran. World Family Med J 2018;99:1-4.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Jiang SS, Shen LP, Ruan HF, Li L, Gao LL, Wan LH. Family function and health behaviours of stroke survivors. Int J Nurs Sci 2014;1:272-6.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Amiri M. The relationship between familial performance, social support and demographic variables with parenting stress and mental health among parents of deaf children. J Res Psychol Health 2017;10:63-75.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Nacar M, Baykan Z, Cetinkaya F, Arslantas D, Ozer A, Coskun O, et al. Health promoting lifestyle behaviour in medical students: A multicentre study from turkey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:8969-74.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Unalan D, Senol V, Ozturk A, Erkorkmaz U. A research on the relation between the healthy life style behaviors and selfcare levels of the students in health and social programs of vocational collages. Ann Med Res 2007;14:101-9.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Soleimani M, Hafeznia M, Masodi S, Moradi M, Ordobadi S. Comparison of dimensions of psychopathology, lifestyle and family functioning in female students with eating disorders. Nurs Midwifery J 2016;14:371-79.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Santesteban-Echarri O, MacQueen G, Goldstein BI, Wang J, Kennedy SH, Bray S, et al. Family functioning in youth at-risk for serious mental illness. Compr Psychiatry 2018;87: 17-24.  Back to cited text no. 39
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1190    
    Printed46    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded112    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal