Depressive_symptoms_and_socioeconomic_status_among

PLOS ONE
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Depressive symptoms and socioeconomic

status among the labor force: Evidence from
China’s representative sample
Guoying Zhang1☯, Chang Cai2☯, Wenxin Zou2, Lu Jing2, Shaolong Wu ID2,3*
1 Department of Public Administration, School of Politics and Public Administration, South China Normal
University, Guangzhou, China, 2 Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health,
Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China, 3 Sun Yat-sen Global Health Institute, Institute of State
Governance, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
☯ These authors contributed equally to this work.

a1111111111
* wushlong@mail.sysu.edu.cn
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111 Abstract
Objectives
The purpose of this paper is to describe the prevalence of depressive symptoms in the Chi-
OPEN ACCESS
nese labor force; to explore the relationship between depressive symptoms and socioeco-
Citation: Zhang G, Cai C, Zou W, Jing L, Wu S
(2022) Depressive symptoms and socioeconomic
nomic status among the Chinese labor force, including both the structural determinants and
status among the labor force: Evidence from the intermediary determinants of health inequities; and to identify vulnerable populations
China’s representative sample. PLoS ONE 17(8): who would benefit from intervention measures.
e0272199. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0272199
Methods
Editor: Enamul Kabir, University of Southern
Queensland, AUSTRALIA Data were from the China Labor-Force Dynamics Survey (CLDS) 2016. The Center for Epi-
demiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) was used to assess depressive symptoms.
Received: January 19, 2021
The World Health Organization’s theoretical framework of the social determinants of health
Accepted: July 14, 2022
was adopted to analyze the relationship between social determinants and depressive
Published: August 22, 2022 symptoms.
Copyright: © 2022 Zhang et al. This is an open
access article distributed under the terms of the Results
Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and Of the participants in the research from the Chinese labor force, 17.34% were identified as
reproduction in any medium, provided the original having depressive symptoms. Depression was significantly related to socioeconomic fac-
author and source are credited. tors such as hukou status (p < 0.05 in the age < 45 model), education (p < 0.01 in all five
Data Availability Statement: China Labor-Force models), employment (p < 0.05 in the male model), income (p < 0.05 in all five models), and
Dynamic Survey (CLDS) is a publicly available self-assessed social class position (p < 0.01 in all five models). Intermediary factors were
dataset. When applying for the right to use the
data, the data user should provide true personal
also related to depressive symptoms, such as gender (p < 0.001 in the overall model), age
information to the Social Science Research Center (p < 0.05 in the overall model), marriage (p < 0.05 in the female model), occupational expo-
of Sun Yat-sen University (hereinafter referred to sure (p < 0.01 in the overall model), exercise (p < 0.05 in all five models), and health insur-
as the "Data Provider") and submit the completed
ance (p < 0.05 in the overall model). The results showed that low socioeconomic status was
"Basic Information of Data User Applicant Form" to
the "Data Provider” via csyjzxsys@163.com, by fax associated with an increased risk of depression and there were some gradient changes in
or by mail to the "Data Provider. the distribution of depressive symptoms in socioeconomic status.
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 1 / 17

PLOS ONE Depressive symptoms and socioeconomic status among the labor force
Funding: The author(s) received no specific Conclusions

funding for this work.
The findings showed that depression symptoms are significantly related to structural deter-
Competing interests: The authors have declared
minants and intermediary determinants in China’s labor force. There are some gradient
that no competing interests exist.
changes in the distribution of depressive symptoms among people of different socioeco-
nomic status. Low socioeconomic status is associated with increased risk of depression.
Women, older people, and single and divorced people are the relative vulnerable groups in
China’s labor force.
Introduction
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as a state of complete physical, mental,
and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. Mental health is con-
sidered a very important issue in many countries [1], and depression is given the most atten-
tion among mental health problems. The major manifestations of depression include low
spirits, decreased interest, slow thinking, lack of initiative, pessimism, self-blame, poor sleep,
worry about illness, or experiencing multiple discomforts. Depression may also cause varying
degrees of physical dysfunction, a decreased ability to live well, and cognitive decline. Accord-
ing to the WHO Assembly, depression is also a major contributor to global disability and
should be a cause for concern. About one-fifth of the world’s population suffer from mental or
behavioral disorders at some point in their lives [2, 3].
The Global Health Statistics study identified depression as the fourth biggest cause of dis-
ease burden in 1990, and that 3.7% of the world’s disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) were
caused by depression [4]. In 2000, depression remained the fourth leading cause of disease
burden, accounting for 4.4% of global DALYs and 12% of the world’s total years lived with dis-
ability [5]. The Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 identified mental and substance use dis-
orders as the leading cause of YLDs worldwide, with depressive disorders accounting for
40.5% of DALYs caused by mental and substance use disorders [6].
Surveys conducted in China have estimated that 30% of men and 43% of women aged 45
years and older had depression-related symptoms in 2011 and 2012 [7], and that 23.7% of
migrant workers aged 16 years and older had depressive symptoms in 2011 [8]. A survey con-
ducted in Sichuan province reported that 12.4% of women in rural areas had depressive symp-
toms in 2016 [9]. A study in 2016 using data from the China Health and Retirement
Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) found that more than 32.5% of the population aged 60 and
above had depressive symptoms, with a higher prevalence among females than males [10].
Functional impairment, reduced quality of life, and increased mortality caused by depression
place heavy burdens on both individuals and health systems [11]. Globally, the burden of disease
associated with depression is similar to that of ischemic heart disease, and depression is expected
to be the second most common risk factor for disability by 2020 [12, 13]. Depressed patients are
more likely to have poorer physical health, worse social and role functions, worse perceptions of
health conditions, and greater physical pain than patients with other chronic diseases such as
hypertension, diabetes, and arthritis [14]. Depression poses a growing challenge to health systems
in both developed and developing countries. A clear way to improve the mental health of the pop-
ulation is to develop and promote targeted preventive and therapeutic measures [15].
Current research on depression tends to focus on middle-aged and elderly people. The
labor force, generally a healthier group, has attracted more attention in terms of physical health
problems, including infectious diseases, occupational diseases, and injuries. Their mental
health problems, on the other hand, although as serious as physical disease, have been largely

ignored or forgotten, and are particularly invisible in studies on depression in China. In this
study, a representative Chinese sample of the labor force aged between 15 and 64 was collected
to analyze the prevalence of depressive symptoms and their influencing factors, and to discuss
the underlying mechanisms and available interventive measurements.
Theoretical framework
According to the Health Field Concept framework, direct factors influencing health can be catego-
rized into four types—biology, environment, lifestyle, and health care organization [16]. The
Health Field Concept framework has facilitated the understanding of the causes of disorders, dis-
eases, and death. Furthermore, the distribution of these four types of factors in society is deter-
mined by socioeconomic status, the inequality of which indirectly affects the health of the
population [17]. In 2010, the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), established
by the World Health Organization, developed a conceptual framework of the social determinants
of health, systematically summarizing the various social factors and mechanisms that influence
health inequality [18]. Our study used the WHO’s theory of health inequalities to explore the dis-
tribution of mental health problems and the social influencing factors in the Chinese labor force.
In the study of the social determinants of health, the CSDH recognized individual health to
be influenced by many factors, which can be divided into two basic categories: structural deter-
minants and intermediary determinants. Structural determinants include both socioeconomic
and political context and socioeconomic position. Governance, macroeconomics, social poli-
cies, culture, and societal values are the essential elements of context. Socioeconomic position,
also known as socioeconomic status, is composed of, and can be measured by, social class, gen-
der, education, occupation, and income. Intermediary determinants are also direct factors
affecting heath, indicating that material circumstances, behavior and biological factors, psy-
chological factors, and the health system directly influence health inequality.
Intermediary determinants are influenced by socioeconomic position via the mechanism of
social cohesion and social capital, determining the level and distribution of some direct health-
influencing factors in the health causal chain. This marks the point at which socioeconomic
status factors—such as education, occupation, and income level—shape people’s lives, influ-
encing their exposure to risk factors that directly affect their health. However, socioeconomic
position is not static, as it can be altered by governmental and public policies. Within the
socioeconomic and political context, the government can formulate and implement macroeco-
nomic and social policies and develop governance to improve social inequality.
The WHO framework also shows a pathway from social determinants to health outcomes.
Structural determinants such as education impact people’s health and well-being via their
employment and income, as well as the associated intermediary factors. Examples of socioeco-
nomic status, along with a range of intermediary factors, are listed in Fig 1 below. Well-edu-
cated individuals are more likely to get good jobs, which usually come with high salaries and
low workplace hazards. In addition, high-income people are more likely to have high-quality
housing, as well as better lifestyles and health care.
In summary, individuals with high socioeconomic status and low health risk factors tend to
achieve better health outcomes. The converse is also true. In this study, the theoretical hypoth-
esis is tested using the scale of mental health in China’s labor force.
Methods
Data source
The data in this research originated from the 2016 China Labor-Force Dynamic Survey
(CLDS). It is publicly available, and applications can be made to download it on the website

Fig 1. The conceptual framework of social determinants of health (SDH). Source: World Health Organization,
2010. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. Geneva. p. 6.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199.g001
http://css.sysu.edu.cn/Data. The CLDS is a nationally representative survey designed and

implemented by the Center for Social Survey, Sun Yat-Sen University. The survey is longitudi-
nal and conducted every two years. The baseline survey was completed in 2012, and the 2016
data was the third wave. Interviews were conducted with each person from the workforce
(family members aged 15–64) in the sample households. Based on the investigation of families
and individuals in China’s urban and rural communities, the survey aims to monitor changes
in social structure and socioeconomic status, as well as in health-related conditions.
Sampling and sample size

The CLDS adopted multi-stage, multi-stratified Probability Proportionate to Size Sampling
(PPS). It covered 29 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities (excluding Hong
Kong, Macao, Taiwan, Tibet, and Hainan). Data collection was carried out at three levels. The
first level was the community where the labor force was located, the second was families with
members of the labor force aged between 15 and 64, and the third level was the individual tar-
geted labor force. In 2016, the CLDS collected 401 community questionnaires, 14,226 family
questionnaires, and 21,086 individual questionnaires. All data and samples released were fully
anonymized before researchers accessed them. A total of 19,680 individuals were finally
included in the analysis after excluding cases with missing values.
Dependent variables
The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) was used to measure depres-
sion in the labor force. The CES-D was prepared by the National Institute of Mental Health in
1977 and has been widely used in epidemiological investigations [19], proving its good reliabil-
ity and validity [20, 21]. The scale contains 20 symptom items from four aspects of depression,
namely: depressed affect, positive affect, somatic symptoms and retarded activity, and interper-
sonal relations [19]. Participants were required to give the frequency of the occurrence of
symptoms in the previous week. Each item was measured by four scale choices (less than 1
day, 1–2 days, 3–4 days, 5–7 days), recoded respectively as 0 to 3 for the negative questions
and 3 to 0 for the positive questions. The total score of this scale was between 0–60 points. The

higher the total score of the scale, the more severe the depressive symptoms. Scores �15 were
categorized as no clinical depression, 16–19 as possible depression, and �20 as definite depres-
sion [22, 23]. In this study, depression was divided into two categories: depression (�16 score)
and no depression (<16 score).
Independent variables
According to the WHO’s conceptual framework of the social determinants of health, depres-
sive symptoms as mental health outcomes are influenced by structural determinants and inter-
mediary determinants. Following previous studies on factors affecting depressive symptoms,
this study included the following variables for analysis. The focused variables for structural
determinants were hukou (Chinese household registration system associated with social wel-
fare), education, occupation, work status, income, and self-assessed social class position. The
control variables for the intermediary determinants were biogenetic factors (age, gender),
environment (marital status, exposure to occupational hazards), health-related behavior
(smoking, drinking, exercise), and health care (health insurance).
The variables were coded as follows: Hukou was categorized into agricultural and non-agri-
cultural. Education was categorized into four groups: primary school and below, middle
school, high school, and college and above. Occupation included six subgroups: head of a pub-
lic organization, professional and technical personnel, service industry personnel, manufactur-
ing industry personnel, agriculture personnel, and other occupations. Work status was coded
as five conditions: employee, employer, self-employed, no work experience, and unemployed
for the past year. The annual household disposable income per capita (RMB) of respondents
was broken into three groups (<10,000, 10,000–30,000, and >30,000). The self-assessed social
class position was given the levels 1–10 in the questionnaire and the answers were divided into
three groups: low (levels 1–3), middle (levels 4–7), and high (levels 8–10).
The respondents were divided into two age groups (<45 and �45 years old) and two mari-
tal statuses (married or single). We simply dichotomized exposure to occupational hazards
such as smoking, drinking, exercise, and having health insurance into two groups: yes and no.
Data analysis
The data analysis was conducted using Stata 13.0 software. First, descriptive analysis was car-
ried out. The distributions and statistical significance of depressive symptoms among the vari-
ables were measured by a Chi-square test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify
the factors significantly associated with depression. A total of five regression models were used
to explore the relationship between depression and socioeconomic status by classifying age
and gender. The subgroup analysis provided more information on the influencing factors. The
level of statistical significance was established at P < 0.05 in all models.
Results
Characteristics of respondents
The descriptive results are shown in Table 1. Among 19,680 subjects, 47.4% were male, 56.6%
were aged �45 years, 82.47% were married, and 78.40% had agricultural hukou. The propor-
tion of employees, employers, self-employed people, those with no work experience, and those
unemployed in the past year accounted for 28.2%, 1.37%, 39.25%, 15.13%, and 16.05%, respec-
tively. The proportion of heads of public organizations, professional and technical personnel,
service industry personnel, manufacturing industry personnel, agriculture personnel, and
other occupations accounted for 1.8%, 0.42%, 19.07%, 12.14%, 32.2%, and 34.38%,

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the 2016 CLDS sample (N = 19680).

Variables N %
Gender
Male 9,329 47.40
Female 10,351 52.60
Age
<45 years 8,530 43.34
�45 years 11,150 56.66
Marital status
Married 16,231 82.47
Single 3,449 17.53
Hukou
Agricultural 15,429 78.40
Non-agricultural 4,251 21.60
Work status
Employee 5,550 28.20
Employer 270 1.37
Self-employed 7,724 39.25
No work experience 2,977 15.13
Unemployed for the past year 3,159 16.05
Occupation
Head of public organization 355 1.80
Professional and technical personnel 82 0.42
Service industry personnel 3,753 19.07
Manufacturing industry personnel 2,389 12.14
Agriculture personnel 6,336 32.20
Other personnel 6,765 34.38
Education level
Primary school and below 7,090 36.03
Middle school 6,723 34.16
High school 3,512 17.85
College and above 2,355 11.97
Income per capita (RMB)
Less than 10,000 10,103 51.34
10,000 to 30,000 5,453 27.71
More than 30,000 4,124 20.96
Self-assessed social class position
Low 5,731 29.12
Middle 12,409 63.05
High 1,540 7.83
Health insurance
Yes 17,873 90.82
No 1,807 9.18
Smoke
Yes 5,322 27.04
No 14,358 72.96
Drink
Yes 3,845 19.54
No 15,835 80.46
(Continued )

Table 1. (Continued)
Variables N %
Exercise
Yes 6,189 31.45
No 13,491 68.55
Exposure (n = 17016)
Yes 3,938 23.14
No 13,078 76.86
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199.t001
respectively. The proportion of respondents with education equal to or lower than primary
school was 36.03%, those with junior high school education were 34.16% of the total, those
with high school education made up 17.85%, and 11.97% had college education or above.
Those with an annual household disposable income per capita less than 10,000 RMB, those
with between 10,000 and 30,000 RMB, and those with over 30,000 RMB accounted for 51.34%,
27.71%, and 20.96%, respectively. The majority (63.05%) of the sample considered themselves
as middle class, 29.12% as low class, and 7.83% as high class. Medical insurance was held by
90.82%, respondents who smoked and drank alcohol made up 27.04% and 19.54% of the total,
respectively, and 31.45% reported regularly exercising in the past month. In terms of exposure
to occupational hazards, 23.14% of 17,016 respondents reported this.
Prevalence of depressive symptoms and scores of the scale

Descriptive statistics for CES-D scores of totals, dimensions, and items were reported Table 2.
The mean score of the total scale was 7.345, and 17.34% of all participants reported depressive
symptoms. According to the further detailed results, the scores of items on the dimension of
somatic symptoms and retarded activity were the maximum values of mean and standard devi-
ations, indicating there were more serious problems concerning body sense than affect and
interpersonal relationships. The scores of mean and standard deviations on the dimension of
interpersonal relations were the minimum values, indicating good interpersonal relationships
and social support in China. In general, the scores of items on the dimension of positive affect
were higher than that of depressed affect, indicating that the respondents in China may have a
worse experience with positive affect.
Socioeconomic factors affected depressive symptoms. The results of the univariate anal-
ysis are presented in Table 3. Chi-square analysis showed that the distribution differences of
depressive symptoms were statistically significant among all variables except in those of marital
status and occupational exposure. The prevalence of depressive symptoms was higher among
women (19.57%), the high age group (19.06%), the agricultural hukou group (18.08%), the
uninsured group (20.53%), non-smokers (18.01%), non-drinkers (17.95%), and non-exercisers
(18.71%) than that among men (14.88%), the low age group (18.71%), the non-agricultural
hukou group (14.68%), the insured group (17.03%), smokers (15.56%), drinkers (14.88%), and
exercisers (14.38%), respectively. In terms of work status, those without work experience and
those unemployed for the past year had the highest depression rates (19.79% and 19.47%,
respectively), followed by self-employed people (18.8%), and the employee population
(13.12%). Employers had the lowest depression rate (11.11%). Within occupations, respon-
dents working in agricultural sections reported the highest depression rate (20.25%) and the
professional and technical personnel had the lowest depression rate (10.98%). Unsurprisingly,
the levels of depression gradually decreased the variables of education, income, and self-
assessed social class position increased.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics for each item and dimension and total score in the scale.
Item and dimension N/Mean %/SD 95% CI
Total score of the total scale (0–60) 7.345 9.166 7.217 7.473
<16 16,266 82.66 82.13 83.18
�16 3,414 17.34 16.81 17.87
Depressed affect (0–21) 2.272 3.306 2.225 2.318
I felt like I could not shake off the blues even with help from my family or friends 1.339 0.615 1.330 1.347
I felt depressed 1.468 0.679 1.458 1.477
I thought my life had been a failure 1.32 0.645 1.310 1.328
I felt fearful 1.248 0.553 1.239 1.255
I felt lonely 1.309 0.625 1.299 1.317
I had crying spells 1.208 0.497 1.201 1.215
I felt sad 1.377 0.656 1.367 1.386
Positive affect (0–12) 1.512 2.144 1.482 1.542
I felt that I was just as good as other people 1.442 0.721 1.432 1.452
I felt hopeful about the future 1.349 0.679 1.339 1.358
I was happy 1.462 0.678 1.452 1.471
I enjoyed life 1.257 0.578 1.248 1.264
Somatic symptoms and retarded activity (0–21) 3.088 3.436 3.039 3.135
I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me 1.534 0.726 1.523 1.544
I did not feel like eating; my appetite was poor 1.504 0.729 1.493 1.514
I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing 1.401 0.652 1.392 1.410
I felt that everything I did was an effort 1.48 0.746 1.469 1.490
My sleep was restless 1.62 0.859 1.608 1.632
I talked less than usual 1.365 0.635 1.355 1.373
I could not get “going” 1.18 0.488 1.173 1.186
Interpersonal relations (0–6) 0.475 0.963 0.462 0.489
People were unfriendly 1.253 0.541 1.245 1.260
I felt that people disliked me 1.221 0.508 1.213 1.228
The multivariate analysis results are reported in Table 4. In terms of statistically significant
results, this research indicated that almost all variables that measured socioeconomic status
demonstrated an association with depressive symptoms. The risk of depression in the non-
agricultural hukou group was higher than that in the agricultural hukou group (OR = 1.230,
P < 0.05) in the age < 45 model. However, the opposite was true in the age � 45 model. In
comparison to the labor force with primary school education or below, the risk of depression
among those in the higher education level was lower in all five models, indicating the impor-
tance of education. There was a significant difference in the distribution of depressive symp-
toms depending on work status. Male self-employed respondents had a lower risk of
depression than male employees, but the female model showed the opposite result. Therefore,
it seems more difficult for women to seek self-employment in China than for men. Those
engaged in agriculture were more at risk of depression than were heads of a public organiza-
tion (OR = 1.980, P < 0.05) in the male model. The risk of depression for manufacturing
industry personnel was lower than that for heads of a public organization (OR = 0.546,
P < 0.05) in the female model, indicating greater pressure for female heads of public organiza-
tions. Respondents in both the 10,000 to 30,000 and the 30,000 and above income groups were
less likely to have depression than those with an income below 10,000 in all five models. It is
not surprising that income level is closely associated with depressive symptoms across most

Table 3. Chi-square analysis of the relationship of factors with depressive symptoms.

Variables No depression Depression Chi-square value P value
Gender
Male 7,941 (85.12) 1,388 (14.88) 75.4232 0.000
Female 8,325 (80.43) 2,026 (19.57)
Age
<45 years 7,241 (84.89) 1,289 (15.11) 52.5076 0.000
�45 years 9,025 (80.94) 2,125 (19.06)
Marital status
Married 13,430 (82.74) 2,801 (17.26) 0.5286 0.467
Single 2,836 (82.23) 613 (17.77)
Hukou
Agricultural 12,639 (81.92) 2,790 (18.08) 26.9322 0.000
Non-agricultural 3,627 (85.32) 624 (14.68)
Work status
Employee 4,822 (86.88) 728 (13.12) 110.1832 0.000
Employer 240 (88.89) 30 (11.11)
Self-employed 6,272 (81.20) 1,452 (18.80)
No work experience 2,388 (80.21) 589 (19.79)
Unemployed for the past year 2,544 (80.53) 615 (19.47)
Occupation
Head of a public organization 314 (88.45) 41 (11.55) 152.2058 0.000
Professional and technical personnel 73 (89.02) 9 (10.98)
Service industry personnel 3,250 (86.60) 503 (13.40)
Manufacturing industry personnel 2,104 (88.07) 285 (11.93)
Agriculture personnel 5,053 (79.75) 1,283 (20.25)
Other personnel 5,472 (80.89) 1,293 (19.11)
Education level
Primary school and below 5,464 (77.07) 1,626 (22.93) 245.4669 0.000
Junior high school 5,727 (85.19) 996 (14.81)
High school 3,028 (86.22) 484 (13.78)
College and above 2,047 (86.92) 308 (13.08)
Income per capita (RMB)
Less than 10,000 7,995 (79.13) 2,108 (20.87) 188.2647 0.000
10,000 to 30,000 4,654 (85.35) 799 (14.65)
More than 30,000 3,617 (87.71) 507 (12.29)
Self-assessed social class position
Low 4,287 (74.80) 1,444 (25.20) 347.4223 0.000
Middle 10,654 (85.86) 1,755 (14.14)
High 1,325 (86.04) 215 (13.96)
Health insurance
Yes 14,830 (82.97) 3,043 (17.03) 14.0656 0.000
No 1,436 (79.47) 371 (20.53)
Smoke
Yes 4,494 (84.44) 828 (15.56) 16.292 0.000
No 11,772 (81.99) 2,586 (18.01)
Drink
Yes 3,273 (85.12) 572 (14.88) 20.3512 0.000
No 12,993 (82.05) 2,842 (17.95)
(Continued )

Table 3. (Continued)
Variables No depression Depression Chi-square value P value

Exercise
Yes 5,299 (85.62) 890 (14.38) 55.4375 0.000
No 10,967 (81.29) 2,524 (18.71)
Exposure (n = 17016)
Yes 3,251 (82.55) 687 (17.45) 0.1654 0.684
No 10,833 (82.83) 2,245 (17.17)
modern societies. Finally, the risk of depression in participants with high subjective identifica-
tion was less than in those with low subjective identification in all five models, demonstrating
that subjective class assessment can also be effectively used to explore the relationship between
depression and socioeconomic status.
In terms of biogenetic factors, women were more likely to have depressive symptoms than
men in the overall model, the < 45 model, and the � 45 model, and the older respondents had
a higher risk of depressive symptoms than younger people in the overall model and the female
model. The results are in line with the laws of mental health. Using marital status as an indica-
tor of social environment, single or divorced respondents had a higher risk of depression than
those who were married (OR = 1.205, P < 0.05) in the female model and the � 45 model. In
terms of workplace environment, respondents exposed to occupational hazards were more
likely to get depressive symptoms than those without exposure in the overall model, the female
model, and the � 45 model. A good environment, both physical and social, is again shown to
be good for health. The most important direct factor for health is behavior such as smoking,
drinking, and exercising. Surprisingly, in all five models, the test of the relationship between
depressive symptoms and smoking and drinking was not statistically significant. It is possible
that drinking and smoking as interpersonal interactions in China can alleviate psychological
stress. The variable of exercising significantly affected depressive symptoms in all five models,
suggesting exercise as the most simple and effective intervention. Using health insurance to
represent health care, uninsured respondents had a higher risk of depressive symptoms than
those insured in the overall model, the female model, and the < 45 model. Health insurance is
also a cost-effective variable that can be an intervention measure.
Discussion
Depression is a significant public health issue that causes a variety of emotional and physical
problems. This study used nationally representative data on the Chinese labor force to estimate
the prevalence of depressive symptoms and explore their socioeconomic influencing factors.
Our findings indicated that all socioeconomic factors were significantly associated with
depressive symptoms. This research spotlights the importance of socioeconomic determinants
of mental health and supports the hypothesis that people with high socioeconomic status tend
to achieve better health outcomes.
Our study reported the prevalence of depressive symptoms in China’s labor force at 17.34%
in 2016. As the working population tends to be healthier than other population groups, depres-
sive symptoms should be relatively lower than among other groups. According to a nationwide
survey in China in 2018, the prevalence of depressive symptoms among informal and formal
employees were 25.5% and 19.3%, respectively [24]. The prevalence of depressive symptoms in
other vulnerable populations, such as suicide attempters 60.4% [20], postpartum mothers 30%
[25], female migrant workers 25.58% [26], and middle-aged and older Chinese people 18.6%

Table 4. Multivariate regression analysis of the relationship between factors and depressive symptoms among the labor force.
Independent variable Overall (n = 17016) Male (n = 8293) Female (n = 8723) Age < 45 (n = 7351) Age � 45 years
(n = 9665)
OR 95% CI OR 95% CI OR 95% CI OR 95% CI OR 95% CI
Gender: (ref = male) 1.300�� 1.165 1.450 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.215� 1.031 1.431 1.342�� 1.156 1.559
Age: (ref = < 45) 1.125� 1.019 1.242 0.992 0.848 1.159 1.228�� 1.078 1.400 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Marital status: (ref = married) 1.129 0.998 1.277 0.981 0.810 1.188 1.205� 1.020 1.424 1.148 0.965 1.367 1.260� 1.036 1.532
Hukou: (ref = agricultural) 0.997 0.878 1.132 1.096 0.909 1.323 0.906 0.762 1.078 1.230� 1.030 1.469 0.774�� 0.643 0.932
Work status: (ref = employees)
Employer 1.027 0.672 1.570 0.937 0.556 1.587 1.16 0.562 2.396 1.204 0.747 1.942 0.488 0.175 1.361
Self-employed 0.952 0.793 1.143 0.712�� 0.553 0.916 1.376� 1.048 1.806 0.831 0.640 1.080 1.095 0.843 1.422
No work experience 1.164 0.866 1.565 1.119 0.735 1.703 1.37 0.886 2.118 1.07 0.700 1.636 1.408 0.916 2.162
Unemployed for the past year 1.087 0.804 1.468 1.001 0.649 1.544 1.301 0.837 2.021 0.981 0.605 1.591 1.193 0.783 1.819
Occupation: (ref = head of public organization)
Professional and technical personnel 0.758 0.320 1.793 0.439 0.098 1.959 1.035 0.333 3.212 0.801 0.282 2.277 0.759 0.158 3.634
Service industry personnel 0.987 0.684 1.423 1.269 0.781 2.061 0.717 0.406 1.269 1.111 0.677 1.825 0.881 0.509 1.525
Manufacturing industry personnel 0.769 0.524 1.127 1.096 0.664 1.809 0.546� 0.298 0.997 0.91 0.541 1.532 0.654 0.370 1.158
Agriculture personnel 1.178 0.787 1.763 1.980� 1.161 3.377 0.608 0.325 1.137 1.457 0.827 2.569 1 0.555 1.802
Other personnel 0.976 0.631 1.510 1.514 0.852 2.690 0.584 0.296 1.152 1.082 0.598 1.958 0.917 0.480 1.753
Education level: (ref = primary school and below)
Middle school 0.669�� 0.603 0.741 0.637�� 0.545 0.744 0.715�� 0.622 0.823 0.574�� 0.479 0.687 0.766�� 0.673 0.871
��
High school 0.642 0.557 0.739 0.643 0.525 0.787 0.658 0.538 0.806 0.577 0.462 0.722 0.740�� 0.608 0.900
College and above 0.727�� 0.603 0.876 0.794 0.605 1.041 0.684�� 0.526 0.891 0.585�� 0.454 0.755 0.986 0.699 1.392
Income per capita: (ref = less than 10,000)
10,000 to 30,000 0.750�� 0.661 0.850 0.792� 0.657 0.954 0.719�� 0.604 0.855 0.863 0.684 1.089 0.711�� 0.611 0.827
More than 30,000 0.812�� 0.692 0.952 0.756� 0.601 0.951 0.893 0.710 1.122 0.87 0.672 1.126 0.773� 0.624 0.959
Self-assessed social class position: (ref = low)
Middle 0.507�� 0.465 0.553 0.583�� 0.511 0.666 0.458�� 0.408 0.513 0.505�� 0.439 0.581 0.510�� 0.457 0.570
��
High 0.529 0.445 0.628 0.624 0.487 0.799 0.453 0.356 0.576 0.682 0.531 0.876 0.424�� 0.334 0.539
Medical insurance: (ref = yes) 1.160� 1.013 1.327 1.04 0.839 1.289 1.247� 1.047 1.485 1.223� 1.007 1.485 1.11 0.919 1.340
Smoke: (ref = yes) 0.984 0.870 1.113 0.913 0.797 1.046 1.027 0.719 1.467 0.989 0.805 1.216 0.991 0.847 1.159
Drink: (ref = yes) 1.058 0.936 1.196 1.115 0.973 1.278 0.781 0.595 1.025 0.997 0.810 1.227 1.089 0.936 1.267
Exercise: (ref = yes) 1.214�� 1.101 1.338 1.225�� 1.054 1.423 1.229�� 1.079 1.399 1.251�� 1.075 1.455 1.181� 1.039 1.343
Exposure: (ref = no) 1.177�� 1.063 1.304 1.006 0.868 1.167 1.376�� 1.194 1.585 1.154 0.972 1.369 1.183� 1.041 1.343
Constant 0.279 0.184 0.423 0.227 0.129 0.397 0.605 0.289 1.268 0.276 0.152 0.501 0.309 0.173 0.551
[27], also supports the case for the relative health of the labor force. However, health inequality
still exists in the subpopulations of China’s labor force, and is determined by socioeconomic
status.
As with most populous developing countries, the urban-rural dual structure is the basis of
socioeconomic status in China. In general, urban residents tend to enjoy better living condi-
tions, healthier lifestyles, and lower health risks than rural residents. An exploration of the rela-
tionship between depression and hukou status in Chinese people aged 45 and over showed the
level of depressive symptoms to be significantly higher in the population of agricultural hukou
[28]. This is in accordance with our research and supports the hypothesis regarding the effects
of socioeconomic status on health. However, the opposite results have also been found among
those aged less than 45 years. Since this has rarely appeared in previous literature, we infer that
it may be caused by fierce market competition and social stress in urban areas. The young
labor force tends to face much stronger market competition in urban areas than in rural areas.

After middle age, people in rural areas tend to have poorer social security than those living in
urban areas.
A lower education level was significantly associated with depressive symptoms, consistent
with previous research. It may be inferred that those with higher education levels have better
perceptions of stress and self-regulation and formed a regulation mechanism against external
pressure during their education. Furthermore, they have a better sense of pressure control,
allowing them to adopt better strategies in the face of obstacles [29]. Comparably, those with
low education levels may lack coping skills when facing challenges in life [30–32]. Education is
a part of an individual’s resources and is more stable than other factors, such as training, that
can affect occupation and income.
Using industries and employment to measure occupation, this study found some gender
differences in depressive symptoms. Respondents with low-level occupations had a higher risk
of depression in our research, consistent with relevant previous studies [33]. In terms of the
distribution of depressive symptoms among the self-employed and employees, women and
men had diametrically opposite mental health effects. The results suggest that we should pay
more attention to the mental health of low-level occupation groups in China, especially self-
employed women.
In the market economy, income is the most important indicator of economic status for the
labor force, although some who are economically inactive are financially supported by their
rich families. This paper attempted to accurately measure the relative economic position of the
labor force through annual household disposable income per capita, which is similar to
national disposable income per capita. Previous studies have confirmed that the risk of depres-
sion in high-income groups was lower than in low-income groups [34]. As an important eco-
nomic resource for individuals, income provides risk protection and enables people to seek
high-quality psychotherapy services in the event of emotional problems [35]. Although the
social security system is helpful in reducing the income gap between different social classes,
the cost of policy intervention can be enormous.
In terms of self-assessed social class status, the results of this study also support the hypothe-
sis regarding the impact of socioeconomic status on health. Individuals with a higher self-
assessed social class position had less risk of depressive symptoms. Previous studies have
shown that individuals with higher socioeconomic status may have a lower risk of depression
[36–38]. Individuals with a higher social class position have more resources, including income,
education, and social support. When these individuals are faced with stressful events or low
mood, they have more resources and coping styles to alleviate the degree of depression. Self-
assessed social class position not only refers to the current overall self-assessment of socioeco-
nomic status, but also reflects past living standards, including health levels. It is possible that
good physical and mental health in the past affects a person’s current mental health.
This study also reported the effect of biogenetic factors. The risk of depression in older peo-
ple was higher than in younger people, consistent with a study conducted in the Norwegian
population. As age increases, an individual’s physical health becomes more fragile and more
vulnerable to disease and damage to health, which may result in being unable to adapt to cer-
tain job requirements [39, 40]. Despite great progress in women’s rights and welfare in China,
the female respondents were still more likely to suffer depressive symptoms than were the
male respondents. With further social and economic development, we hope conditions could
improve rapidly.
The social support provided by marriage suggests that the loss of a spouse is often associated
with an increased risk of depression due to loss of financial, emotional, physical, and instru-
mental support. On one hand, the social relations and habit patterns of recently single or
divorced people are changed, potentially making them more vulnerable to stressful events. On

the other hand, social resources are more commonly available to married than to divorced
people, reducing the severity of emotionally damaging events for married people and making
it easier for them to recover from stress and despair [41]. Occupational hazards are a direct
influencing factor, as labor force workers may experience increased psychological stress due to
health damage caused by occupational exposure. Additionally, occupational hazards can cause
physical damage, resulting in a decline in labor income due to the cost of treatment, and may
thus generate a higher risk of depression [42, 43]. Environmental factors, although not immu-
table, are also very difficult to change or to intervene in over a short time.
The prevalence of depression in non-smoking and non-drinking individuals was higher
than in those who smoked and drank alcohol. This may be due to the fact that smoking and
drinking can have an alleviating effect on depressive symptoms [44, 45]. Whether or not
respondents participated in exercise significantly affected the level of depressive symptoms.
Literature has shown that exercise is an evidence-based treatment for depression and its anti-
depression effect can be compared with drugs and other measures. Moreover, the treatment
effect is more obvious in patients with major depression [46, 47]. Within their social circles,
individuals are afraid of being discriminated against or stigmatized if they show signs of
depression. Exercise is a viable treatment that can be used by most depressed patients and does
not bring a negative social stigma. As an integral part of an individual’s lifestyle, exercise can
alleviate stress and reduce the risk of depressive symptoms [48].
The results show that a lack of health insurance may also increase the risk of depression,
suggesting that being uninsured is a risk factor for depression [49, 50]. As an important eco-
nomic aspect of an individual’s medical services, health insurance determines to some extent
whether one can actively seek medical services. Purchasing health insurance can increase one’s
sense of security and reduce the financial and psychological stress of receiving medical treat-
ment. Uninsured individuals who suffer health issues may be unable to afford medical
expenses and therefore either reduce or not seek medical services at all, which may have
adverse effects on their mental health [51]. In recent years China has almost achieved universal
health insurance nationwide, but the health coverage of migrant workers still poses a challenge
to be overcome.
The policy implications of this study aim to find the vulnerable groups and the intervention
field of China’s labor force. Based on the multivariate results, China’s public policies should
focus more on the mental health problems of women, older people, and single and divorced
people in the labor force to improve health inequalities. It would also be beneficial to expand
health insurance coverage, promote education popularization, and reduce occupational hazard
exposure to improve the mental health of China’s labor force.
Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, the CES-D scale is a self-report
inventory that uses a continuous scale to define the levels of depressive symptoms; participants
may be biased in the reporting process and their judgment of depressive symptoms is not as
accurate as a clinical diagnosis. However, the literature suggests that the CES-D scale is effi-
cient and effective in assessing the symptoms of depression in the population. Second, the
study was a cross-sectional survey, and we were unable to determine the causal relationship
between depression and the above factors. However, due to the fact that this study was a large
sample investigation, the results provide relevant suggestions for the relationship between
depression and its influencing factors. In order to further explore the role of various risk fac-
tors in the development of depression, we need to conduct a longitudinal research study.

Conclusion
This study explored the socioeconomic factors that affect the mental health status of the labor
force in China. The results showed that low socioeconomic status is associated with increased
risk of depression. Depression symptoms are significantly related to structural determinants,
such as hukou status, education, occupation, employment, income, and self-assessed social
class position. Symptoms of depression are also related to intermediary determinants, such as
age, gender, marriage, health insurance, exercise, and occupational hazard exposure. Women,
older people, and single and divorced people are the relative vulnerable groups in China’s
labor force. Although the relationship between mental health and socioeconomic status is not
necessarily a causal relationship, it shows that there are some gradient changes in the distribu-
tion of depressive symptoms among people of different socioeconomic status.
Supporting information
S1 File. CLDS-questionnaire.
(DOC)
S2 File. The data in this research originated from the 2016 China Labor-Force Dynamic
Survey (CLDS).
(ZIP)
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: Guoying Zhang, Shaolong Wu.
Data curation: Chang Cai, Wenxin Zou, Lu Jing.
Formal analysis: Chang Cai, Shaolong Wu.
Methodology: Guoying Zhang, Chang Cai.
Resources: Shaolong Wu.
Software: Wenxin Zou, Lu Jing.
Supervision: Shaolong Wu.
Writing – original draft: Guoying Zhang, Chang Cai, Shaolong Wu.
Writing – review & editing: Guoying Zhang, Wenxin Zou, Shaolong Wu.
References
1. Patel V, Flisher AJ, Hetrick S, McGorry P. Mental health of young people: a global public-health chal-
lenge. Lancet. 2007; 369(9569):1302–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60368-7 PMID:
17434406
2. Drew N, Faydi E, Freeman M, Funk M. Mental health and development: targeting people with mental
health conditions as a vulnerable group: World Health Organization; 2010.
3. Sayers J. The world health report 2001-Mental health: new understanding, new hope. B World Health
Organ. 2001; 79:1085–.
4. Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Global health statistics: a compendium of incidence, prevalence and mortality
estimates for over 200 conditions. Global Burden of Disease and Injury Series (No 2): Harvard Univer-
sity Press; 1996.
5. Ustun TB, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Chatterji S, Mathers C, Murray CJ. Global burden of depressive disorders
in the year 2000. Br J Psychiatry. 2004; 184:386–92. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.184.5.386 PMID:
15123501
6. Whiteford HA, Degenhardt L, Rehm J, Baxter AJ, Ferrari AJ, Erskine HE, et al. Global burden of disease
attributable to mental and substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study

2010. Lancet. 2013; 382(9904):1575–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61611-6 PMID:

23993280
7. Lei XY, Sun XT, Strauss J, Zhang P, Zhao YH. Depressive symptoms and SES among the mid-aged
and elderly in China: Evidence from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study national base-
line. Social Science & Medicine. 2014; 120:224–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.09.028
PMID: 25261616.
8. Qiu PY, Caine E, Yang Y, Chen Q, Li J, Ma X. Depression and associated factors in internal migrant
workers in China. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2011; 134(1–3):198–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.
2011.05.043 PMID: 21705089
9. Qiu PY, Caine ED, Hou FS, Cerulli C, Wittink MN, Li J. The Prevalence of Distress and Depression
among Women in Rural Sichuan Province. Plos One. 2016; 11(8):e0161097. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0161097 PMID: 27526182
10. Xu Y, Yang J, Gao J, Zhou Z, Zhang T, Ren J, et al. Decomposing socioeconomic inequalities in
depressive symptoms among the elderly in China. BMC Public Health. 2016 Dec 1; 16(1):1214. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3876-1 PMID: 27905918
11. Lépine JP, Briley M. The increasing burden of depression. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2011; 7(Suppl
1):3–7. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S19617 PMID: 21750622
12. Murray CJ, Lopez AD, WHO. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality
and disability from diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020: summary: World
Health Organization; 1996.
13. WHO. The world health report 2002: reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva: World Health
Organization; 2002.
14. Wells KB, Stewart A, Hays RD, Burnam MA, Rogers W, Daniels M, et al. The functioning and well-being
of depressed patients. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA. 1989; 262(7):914–9. PMID:
2754791.
15. Arango C, Diaz-Caneja CM, McGorry PD, Rapoport J, Sommer IE, Vorstman JA, et al. Preventive strat-
egies for mental health. Lancet Psychiatry. 2018; 5(7):591–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366
(18)30057-9 PMID: 29773478.
16. Labelle H. A new perspective on the health of Canadians. AARN news letter. 1976; 32(6):1–5. PMID:
1051783
17. Graham H, Kelly MP. Health inequalities: concepts, frameworks and policy: Health Development
Agency London; 2004.
18. WHO. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. Geneva: WHO Docu-
ment Production Services, 2010.
19. Radloff LS. A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied psychol Mea-
surements. 1977; 1:385–401.
20. Yang L, Jia CX, Qin P. Reliability and validity of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale
(CES-D) among suicide attempters and comparison residents in rural China. BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Apr
9; 15:76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-015-0458-1 PMID: 25886490
21. Zhang J, Sun WW, Kong YY, Wang CT. Reliability and validity of the Center for Epidemiological Studies
Depression Scale in 2 special adult samples from rural China. Compr Psychiat. 2012; 53(8):1243–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.03.015 PMID: 22520090
22. Kohout FJ, Berkman LF, Evans DA, Cornoni-Huntley J. Two shorter forms of the CES-D (Center for Epi-
demiological Studies Depression) depression symptoms index. J Aging Health. 1993; 5(2):179–93.
https://doi.org/10.1177/089826439300500202 PMID: 10125443
23. Park SG, Min KB, Chang SJ, Kim HC, Min JY. Job stress and depressive symptoms among Korean
employees: the effects of culture on work. Int Arch Occ Env Hea. 2009; 82(3):397–405. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00420-008-0347-8 PMID: 18622624
24. Cai Y, Kong W, Lian Y, Jin X. Depressive Symptoms among Chinese Informal Employees in the Digital
Era. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 May 14; 18(10):5211. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph18105211 PMID: 34068883
25. Chi X, Zhang P, Wu H, Wang J. Screening for Postpartum Depression and Associated Factors Among
Women in China: A Cross-Sectional Study. Front Psychol. 2016 Nov 1; 7:1668. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2016.01668 PMID: 27847483
26. Lommel L, Hu X, Sun M, Chen JL. Frequency of depressive symptoms among female migrant workers
in China: associations with acculturation, discrimination, and reproductive health. Public Health. 2020;
181:151–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2019.12.006 PMID: 32036172

27. Li Y, Wu Y, Zhai L, Wang T, Sun Y, Zhang D. Longitudinal Association of Sleep Duration with Depres-
sive Symptoms among Middle-aged and Older Chinese. Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 18; 7(1):11794 https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41598-017-12182-0 PMID: 28924238
28. Guo J, Guan L, Fang L, Liu C, Fu M, He H, et al. Depression among Chinese older adults: A perspective
from Hukou and health inequities. J Affect Disord. 2017 Dec 1; 223:115–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jad.2017.07.032 PMID: 28753468
29. Williams DR. Socioeconomic Differentials in Health: a Review and Redirection. Soc Psychol Quart.
1990; 53(2):81–99. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786672
30. Bjelland I, Krokstad S, Mykletun A, Dahl AA, Tell GS, Tambs K. Does a higher educational level protect
against anxiety and depression? The HUNT study. Social Science & Medicine. 2008; 66(6):1334–45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.12.019 PMID: 18234406
31. Chazelle E, Lemogne C, Morgan K, Kelleher CC, Chastang JF, Niedhammer I. Explanations of educa-
tional differences in major depression and generalised anxiety disorder in the Irish population. Journal
of Affective Disorders. 2011; 134(1–3):304–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.05.049 PMID:
21676469
32. Dudal P, Bracke P. Absolute and relative educational inequalities in depression in Europe. International
Journal of Public Health. 2016; 61(7):787–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-016-0837-5 PMID:
27220547
33. Fan ZJ, Bonauto DK, Foley MP, Anderson NJ, Yragui NL, Silverstein BA. Occupation and the preva-
lence of current depression and frequent mental distress, WA BRFSS 2006 and 2008. Am J Ind Med.
2012; 55(10):893–903. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22094 PMID: 22821712
34. Zimmerman FJ, Katon W. Socioeconomic status, depression disparities, and financial strain: what lies
behind the income-depression relationship? Health Economics. 2005; 14(12):1197–215. https://doi.org/
10.1002/hec.1011 PMID: 15945040
35. Dismuke CE, Egede LE. Association between major depression, depressive symptoms and personal
income in US adults with diabetes. Gen Hosp Psychiat. 2010; 32(5):484–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
genhosppsych.2010.06.004 PMID: 20851268
36. Li LW, Liu JY, Xu HW, Zhang ZM. Understanding Rural-Urban Differences in Depressive Symptoms
Among Older Adults in China. Journal of Aging and Health. 2016; 28(2):341–62. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0898264315591003 PMID: 26100620
37. Post DM, Gehlert S, Hade EM, Reiter PL, Ruffin M, Paskett ED. Depression and SES in women from
Appalachia. Journal of Rural Mental Health. 2013; 37(1):2.
38. Wang H, Yang XY, Yang T, Cottrell RR, Yu L, Feng X, et al. Socioeconomic inequalities and mental
stress in individual and regional level: a twenty one cities study in China. Int J Equity Health. 2015 Mar
7; 14:25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-015-0152-4 PMID: 25889251
39. Snowdon J. Is depression more prevalent in old age? Aust Nz J Psychiat. 2001; 35(6):782–7. https://
doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1614.2001.00968.x PMID: 11990889
40. Stordal E, Mykletun A, Dahl AA. The association between age and depression in the general population:
a multivariate examination. Acta Psychiat Scand. 2003; 107(2):132–41. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-
0447.2003.02056.x PMID: 12534439
41. Kessler RC, Essex M. Marital status and depression: The importance of coping resources. Social
forces. 1982; 61(2):484–507.
42. Asfaw A, Souza K. Incidence and cost of depression after occupational injury. J Occup Environ Med.
2012 Sep; 54(9):1086–91. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182636e29 PMID: 22929794
43. Kim J. Depression as a psychosocial consequence of occupational injury in the US working population:
findings from the medical expenditure panel survey. BMC Public Health. 2013 Apr 5; 13:303. https://doi.
org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-303 PMID: 23560685
44. Crum RM, Brown C, Liang KY, Eaton WW. The association of depression and problem drinking: Analy-
ses from the Baltimore ECA follow-up study. Addictive Behaviors. 2001; 26(5):765–73. https://doi.org/
10.1016/s0306-4603(00)00163-5 PMID: 11676386
45. Lerman C, Caporaso N, Main D, Audrain J, Boyd NR, Bowman ED, et al. Depression and self-medica-
tion with nicotine: the modifying influence of the dopamine D4 receptor gene. Health Psychol. 1998 Jan;
17(1):56–62. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-6133.17.1.56 PMID: 9459071
46. Dinas PC, Koutedakis Y, Flouris AD. Effects of exercise and physical activity on depression. Irish J Med
Sci. 2011; 180(2):319–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-010-0633-9 PMID: 21076975
47. Schuch FB, Vancampfort D, Richards J, Rosenbaum S, Ward PB, Stubbs B. Exercise as a treatment
for depression: A meta-analysis adjusting for publication bias. J Psychiatr Res. 2016 Jun; 77:42–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.02.023 PMID: 26978184

48. Dunn AL, Trivedi MH, Kampert JB, Clark CG, Chambliss HO. Exercise treatment for depression: effi-
cacy and dose response. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 28(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.09.
003 PMID: 15626549
49. Yaka E, Keskinoglu P, Ucku R, Yener GG, Tunca Z. Prevalence and risk factors of depression among
community dwelling elderly. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014 Jul-Aug; 59(1):150–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.archger.2014.03.014 PMID: 24767692
50. Zhong BL, Chen HH, Zhang JF, Xu HM, Zhou C, Yang F, et al. Prevalence, correlates and recognition
of depression among inpatients of general hospitals in Wuhan, China. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2010 May-
Jun; 32(3):268–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.01.016 PMID: 20430230
51. Tian D, Qu Z, Wang X, Guo J, Xu F, Zhang X, et al. The role of basic health insurance on depression:
an epidemiological cohort study of a randomized community sample in northwest China. BMC Psychia-
try. 2012 Sep 20; 12:151. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-12-151 PMID: 22994864

Depressive_symptoms_and_socioeconomic_status_among

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Depressive_symptoms_and_socioeconomic_status_among

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Depressive_symptoms_and_socioeconomic_status_among

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLOS ONE

Depressive symptoms and socioeconomic

☯ These authors contributed equally to this work.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 1 / 17

Funding: The author(s) received no specific Conclusions

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 2 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 3 / 17

http://css.sysu.edu.cn/Data. The CLDS is a nationally representative survey designed and

Sampling and sample size

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 4 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 5 / 17

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the 2016 CLDS sample (N = 19680).

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 6 / 17

Prevalence of depressive symptoms and scores of the scale

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 7 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 8 / 17

Table 3. Chi-square analysis of the relationship of factors with depressive symptoms.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 9 / 17

Variables No depression Depression Chi-square value P value

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 10 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 11 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 12 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 13 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 14 / 17

2010. Lancet. 2013; 382(9904):1575–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61611-6 PMID:

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 15 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 16 / 17

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272199 August 22, 2022 17 / 17

You might also like