ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Where you live, what you do: depression differences among diverse Chinese nongmin through cognitive openness.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the depression levels among Workers with Agricultural Hukou (WAH) in China, considering their varied living environments, types of work, and social discrimination experiences. It specifically addresses the research question: Is there a significant discrepancy in depression levels among different subgroups within WAH? Methods: The study utilizes data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) for the years 2018 and 2020. To estimate the depression levels and their variances across different WAH subgroups, we employed three analytical methods: Ordinary Least Squares, Propensity Score Matching, and Two-Stage Least Squares. Results: Our findings indicate that all WAH subgroups experience higher levels of depression compared to Workers with Non-Agricultural Hukou (WNAH). Among the WAH subgroups, the depression levels, in ascending order, are observed in Rural-to-Urban Migrant Workers (RUMW), Rural Non-Agricultural Workers (RNAW), Subsistence Farmers, and Agricultural Laborers. Notably, these differences in depression levels may be influenced by the mechanism of cognitive openness. Conclusion: The study concludes that there are significant disparities in depression levels among WAH subgroups. Understanding these differences is crucial for targeted mental health interventions and for addressing the broader implications of social discrimination and work-related stress among agricultural workers in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.