Since the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was reported in Wuhan, China,¹ severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the causative virus for the global pandemic.² On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared that the COVID-19 outbreak was a pandemic. Widespread outbreaks of COVID-19 were associated with psychological distress and symptoms of mental illness.³ Previous studies have observed moderate to severe psychological distress symptoms, such as depression and anxiety, among the populations in areas severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.^4,5 Moreover, compounding factors, such as high mortality rate, shortage of medical protective materials, social isolation, and media information overload, could be associated with further adverse mental health outcomes during the pandemic.⁶ To date, the increasing attention toward on mental health status has shown that subsyndromal mental health problems are a common response to the COVID-19 pandemic.³ For example, a study by Wang et al⁷ found moderate to severe depressive symptoms in 16.5% of the general population in China, while moderate to severe anxiety symptoms were observed in 28.8% of the population and moderate to severe stress symptoms were observed in 8.1% of the population. Although many studies have focused on the general population,⁷ the mental health status of specific populations during the COVID-19 outbreak is attracting an increasing amount of attention. For example, Chen et al⁸ found that there was a negative association between internet-related behaviors and psychological distress among children in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the power to determine the impacts of this unprecedented pandemic on the mental health status of adolescents is limited by the small sample size of previous studies. In addition, it is unclear what potential factors may be associated with risk of or protection from adverse outcomes in adolescents’ mental health status, and this lack of knowledge might impede the use of proper psychological interventions for adolescents.

Previous literature has shown that chronic diseases and psychological distress are correlated. However, the mediating and moderating mechanisms underlying this relationship have not been sufficient...

Objectives: Lifestyles, accounting for 53% in determining death, play a vital role in improving the health of older adults. Thus, this study aimed to explore the influencing factors of the health-promoting-lifestyles and interaction mechanisms among older adults. Methods: A total of 8526 elders were selected by a three-stage stratified random cluster sampling method. Socioeconomic status, family relationships, social support, health-related quality of life (QOL), and health-promoting-lifestyles (HPLP) of older adults were assessed with the Social Support Rating Scale, the short form 36 health survey (SF-36) and Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile. A structural equation model (SEM) was conducted to test the direct and indirect association between influencing factors with HPLP. Results: In this study, there were 4901 older adults who were empty nesters, and 3625 were non-empty nesters. Of all respondents, the average QOL score of older adults was 62.28 ± 16.51, average social support score was 78.06 ± 7.50. The HPLP score of older adults was 105.9 ± 19.6, and the average score of subscales was 2.5 ± 0.5, which was at the medium level. Social support had a positive and direct effect on HPLP of older adults (total effect, 0.34). Meanwhile, social support mediated the relationship between socioeconomic (total effect, 0.17), QOL (total effect, 0.33) and HPLP. Family relationships had a small indirect effect on HPLP via social support (0.01). Conclusions: Social support is the strongest influencing factor in the health-promoting-lifestyles among older adults, followed by socioeconomic, health-related quality of life and family support. Thus, maintaining higher social support was important to improve the HPLP of older adults.

Background: This study uses scientometrics methodology to reveal the status quo and emerging issues of collaboration in health management. Methods: We searched all the articles with the keyword “health management” in the period 1999–2011 in Web of Knowledge, then 3067 articles were found. Methods such as Social network analysis (SNA), co-authorship, co-word analysis were used in this study. Results: Analysis of the past 13 years of research in the field of health management indicates that, whether the production of scientific research, or authors, institutions and scientific research collaboration at the national level, collaboration behavior has been growing steadily across all collaboration types. However, the international scientific research cooperation about health management study between countries needs to be further encouraged. 17 researchers can be seen as the academic leaders in this field. 37 research institutions play a vital role in the information dissemination and resources control in health management. The component analysis found that 22 research groups can be regarded as the backbone in this field. The 8 institution groups consisting of 33 institutions form the core of this field. USA, UK and Australia lie in the center by cohesive subgroup analysis; Based on keywords analysis, 44 keywords with high frequency such as care, disease, system and model were involved in the health management field. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that although it is growing steadily, collaboration behavior about health management study needs to be enhanced, especially between different institutions or countries/regions, which would promote the progress and internationalization of health management. Besides, researchers should pay attention to the cooperation of representative scholars and institutions, as well as the hot areas of research, because their experience would help us promote the research development of our nation.