Volume 18, Issue 6 (2-2020)                   TB 2020, 18(6): 1-11 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mazloomi mahmood abad S S, Rostampoor M, Nemayande S M, Ganeian M T. The Relationship between Satisfaction with Social Ecological Factors and Quality of Life in Malekan City in 2018. TB. 2020; 18 (6) :1-11
URL: http://tbj.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-2776-en.html
School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi, University of MedicalSciences, Yazd, Iran , ehsan7061@yahoo.com
Full-Text [PDF 513 kb]   (1021 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (2505 Views)
Full-Text:   (28 Views)

The Relationship Between Satisfaction with Social Ecological Factors and Quality of Life in Malekan City in 2018

Seyed Saeed Mazloomi Mahmoodabad (Ph.D.)1, Mahdi Rostampour(M.Sc.)2, Mahdieh Nemayandeh (Ph.D.)3,  Mohammad Taghi Ghaneian(Ph.D.)4
1.Professor, Social Science Research Center of Health, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Science, Yazd, Iran.
2.Corresponding Author: M.Sc. Student in Human Ecology, Faculty of Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. Email:mehdirostampoor1@gmail.com       Tel:09149823801
3.Assistant Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
4.Assistant Professor of Environmental Health, Faculty of Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.

Abstrac

Introduction: Today, quality of life and its influential factors are among the most important challenges of urban life. Knowing the factors affecting the quality of life and the effort to promote these indices is necessary. In this research, social ecological components have been attempted to address the quality of life of people in Malekan City, Iran.
Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted using two questionnaires: the 26-item Quality of Life Questionnaire and the Social Ecological Components Questionnaire developed by the researcher. The multistage sampling method was conducted. In the first stage, the clusters were counted and in the next stage, stratified sampling was performed. Questionnaires were completed in three months. After completing the questionnaires, data were entered into SPSS and statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA.
Results: The results showed that age and gender had no relationship with access to social ecological components. However, they were significantly correlated with occupation and education variables (P =0.0001). Regression analysis revealed that quality of life had a significant relationship between satisfaction with social components and access to these components (P = 0.0001). In other words, more access to social ecological components improved the individuals' quality of life.
Conclusion: According to the findings, it can be concluded that higher levels of access to social ecological components enhanced the people's quality of life. The ability to improve socioeconomic components improved the individuals' quality of life.

Keywords: Quality of Life, Social Ecological Components
Conflict of interest: The authors declared that there is no Conflict interest.
References
1-Hossein M, Siran Ez. Investigating the Impact of Border Markets on the Quality of Life of
Provincial Villagers. Scientific publications of Tehran University.2014: 6(2);255-78.[Persian]
 2-Dehdari T, Heidarnia A, Ramezankhani A, Sadeghian S, Ghofranipour F, Etemad S, et al. Planning and evaluationof an educational intervention programme to improve life quality in patients after coronary artery bypass graft-surgery according to Precede-proceed mode.2018:7(3);105-10. [Persian]
3-Van Kamp I, Leidelmeijer K, Marsman G, De Hollander A. Urban environmental quality and human well-being: Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and urban planning. 2003;65(1-2):5-18.
4-Kokbaye A, Pour Jafar M, Damage AH. Planning the quality of urban life in urban centers. definitions and indicators. Urban Planning. 2005; 12 (4): 6-13. [Persian]
5-SaharbEinifar  A. Foundations of Urbanism. Arman Shahr Architecture and Urban. Design.2014; 3:4-8. [Persian]
 6-Hossein M, Siran Ez. Investigating the Impact of Border Markets on the Quality of Life of the Provincial Villagers. Scientific publications of Tehran University.2014;6(2) ;255-78.[Persian]
7- Mirabadi M, Rajabi A,  Hajilui M. Analysis of inequalities between urban areas based on social, economic and physical indices using quantitative and spatial models (case study: Mahabad city). Urban Management Studies. 2018; 9 (32): 69-85.[Persian]
8-Das D. Urban quality of life: A case study of Guwahati. Social Indicators Research. 2008;88(2):297-310.
9-Lee YJ. Subjective quality of life measurement in Taipei. Building and Environment. 2008;43(7):1205-1.
10- Sahar b.einifar a. Foundations of Urbanism. Arman Shahr Architecture and Urban Design2015; 3:4-8.[Persian]
11- Iran Me. National Accounts of Iran 1991-97, based on the National Accounts System 1993 (SNA 93).
12-Cheshme m, Parvizan, Alizadeh. Extraction and Measurement of Healthy City Indices in Ahwaz Octagonal Regions. Journal of Research and Urban Planning. 2017; 8 (29): 161-78.[Persian]
13-Kochtitzky CS, Frumkin H, Rodriguez R, Dannenberg A, Rayman J, Rose K, et al. Urban planning and public health at CDC. MMWR supplements.2006;55(2):34-8
14-Bahraini Se, Aminzade B. Urban Design in Iran: A New Attitude Academic Center for Scientific Information Database2006. (26):13-26.[Persian]


 
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2018/08/19 | Accepted: 2018/12/3 | Published: 2020/04/26

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2022 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Tolooebehdasht

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb