Perceived Benefits and Harms of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Family Well-Being and Their Sociodemographic Disparities in Hong Kong: A Cross-Sectional Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sample and Procedures
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Dependent Variables
2.2.2. Independent Variables
2.3. Statistical Methods
3. Results
3.1. Participants
3.2. Sex, Age, and SES Differences in Perceived Benefits and Harms
3.3. Adjusted Odds Ratio of Perceived Benefits and Harms of COVID-19 for Sociodemographic Factors
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- World Health Organization. COVID-19 Situation Report-132; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- World Health Organization. WHO COVID-19 Preparedness and Response Progress Report: 1 February to 30 June 2020. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/strategic-preparedness-and-response-plan-for-the-new-coronavirus (accessed on 11 January 2020).
- Thu, T.P.B.; Ngoc, P.N.H.; Hai, N.M.; Tuan, L.A. Effect of the social distancing measures on the spread of COVID-19 in 10 highly infected countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 742, 140430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Centre for Health Protection CHP. Investigates Two Additional Confirmed Cases of COVID-19. Available online: https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202005/31/P2020053100486.htm (accessed on 7 November 2020).
- Kwok, K.O.; Li, K.-K.; Chan, H.H.; Yi, Y.Y.; Tang, A.; Wei, W.I.; Wong, S.Y. Community responses during early phase of covid-19 epidemic, Hong Kong. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 1575–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cheng, K.K.; Lam, T.H.; Leung, C.C. Wearing Face Masks in the Community during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Altruism and Solidarity. Lancet 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cowling, B.J.; Ali, S.T.; Ng, T.W.; Tsang, T.K.; Li, J.C.; Fong, M.W.; Liao, Q.; Kwan, M.Y.; Lee, S.L.; Chiu, S.S. Impact Assessment of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Influenza in Hong Kong: An Observational Study. Lancet Public Health 2020, 5, e279–e288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, H.; Xu, Y.; Dai, J.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, B.; Yang, H. Analyze the Psychological Impact of COVID-19 Among the Elderly Population in China and Make Corresponding Suggestions. Psychiatry Res. 2020, 289, 112983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Ma, Z.F. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health and Quality of Life among Local Residents in Liaoning Province, China: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, C.; Pan, R.; Wan, X.; Tan, Y.; Xu, L.; Ho, C.S.; Ho, R.C. Immediate Psychological Responses and Associated Factors during the Initial Stage of the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Epidemic among the General Population in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Losada-Baltar, A.; Jiménez-Gonzalo, L.; Gallego-Alberto, L.; Pedroso-Chaparro, M.D.S.; Fernandes-Pires, J.; Márquez-González, M. “We’re Staying at Home”. Association of Self-Perceptions of Aging, Personal and Family Resources and Loneliness with Psychological Distress during the Lock-down Period of COVID-19. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2020, gbaa048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Newby, J.M.; O’Moore, K.; Tang, S.; Christensen, H.; Faasse, K. Acute Mental Health Responses during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0236562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gualano, M.R.; Lo Moro, G.; Voglino, G.; Bert, F.; Siliquini, R. Effects of Covid-19 Lockdown on Mental Health and Sleep Disturbances in Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rehman, U.; Shahnawaz, M.G.; Khan, N.H.; Kharshiing, K.D.; Khursheed, M.; Gupta, K.; Kashyap, D.; Uniyal, R. Depression, Anxiety and Stress Among Indians in Times of COVID-19 Lockdown. Community Ment. Health J. 2020, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rossi, R.; Socci, V.; Talevi, D.; Mensi, S.; Niolu, C.; Pacitti, F.; Di Marco, A.; Rossi, A.; Siracusano, A.; Di Lorenzo, G. COVID-19 Pandemic and Lockdown Measures Impact on Mental Health Among the General Population in Italy. Front. Psychiatry 2020, 11, 790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Del Boca, D.; Oggero, N.; Profeta, P.; Rossi, M. Women’s and Men’s Work, Housework and Childcare, before and during COVID-19. Rev. Econ. Househ. 2020, 18, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Craig, L.; Churchill, B. Dual-Earner Parent Couples’ Work and Care during COVID-19. Gend. Work Organ. 2020, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qian, Y.; Fan, W. Who Loses Income During the COVID-19 Outbreak? Evidence from China. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 2020, 68, 100522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Günther-Bel, C.; Vilaregut, A.; Carratala, E.; Torras-Garat, S.; Pérez-Testor, C. A Mixed-Method Study of Individual, Couple and Parental Functioning During the State-Regulated COVID-19 Lockdown in Spain. Fam. Process 2020, 1060–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ausin, B.; Gonzalez-Sanguino, C.; Castellanos, M.A.; Munoz, M. Gender-Related Differences in the Psychological Impact of Confinement as a Consequence of COVID-19 in Spain. J. Gend. Stud. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blundell, R.; Dias, M.C.; Joyce, R.; Xu, X.W. COVID-19 and Inequalities. Fisc. Stud. 2020, 41, 291–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute HKPOP Panel. Available online: https://www.pori.hk/eng/hkpop-panel (accessed on 7 November 2020).
- Census and Statistics Department Table 002: Population by Age Group and Sex. Available online: https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/sp150.jsp?tableID=002&ID=0&productType=8 (accessed on 7 November 2020).
- Australian Bureau of Statistics Sample Size Calculator. Available online: https://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/home/sample+size+calculator (accessed on 14 January 2020).
- Census and Statistics Department Table E034: Median Monthly Domestic Household Income of Economically Active Households by Household Size. Available online: https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/sp150_tc.jsp?productCode=D5250038 (accessed on 7 November 2020).
- Census and Statistics Department Women and Men in Hong Kong—Key Statistics. Available online: https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11303032019AN19B0100.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2020).
- Zhao, S.Z.; Wong, J.Y.H.; Wu, Y.; Choi, E.P.H.; Wang, M.P.; Lam, T.H. Social Distancing Compliance under COVID-19 Pandemic and Mental Health Impacts: A Population-Based Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brock, R.L.; Laifer, L.M. Family Science in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Solutions and New Directions. Fam. Process 2020, 1007–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraenkel, P.; Cho, W.L. Reaching Up, Down, In, and Around: Couple and Family Coping During the Coronavirus Pandemic. Fam. Process 2020, 847–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Prime, H.; Wade, M.; Browne, D.T. Risk and Resilience in Family Well-being during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Am. Psychol. 2020, 75, 631–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brooks, S.K.; Webster, R.K.; Smith, L.E.; Woodland, L.; Wessely, S.; Greenberg, N.; Rubin, G.J. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 2020, 395, 912–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shafer, K.; Scheibling, C.; Milkie, M.A. The Division of Domestic Labor before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada: Stagnation versus Shifts in Fathers’ Contributions. Can. Rev. Sociol. 2020, 57, 523–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lin, C.; Tu, P.; Beitsch, L.M. Confidence and Receptivity for COVID-19 Vaccines: A Rapid Systematic Review. Vaccines 2020, 9, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Irigoyen-Camacho, M.E.; Velazquez-Alva, M.C.; Zepeda-Zepeda, M.A.; Cabrer-Rosales, M.F.; Lazarevich, I.; Castaño-Seiquer, A. Effect of Income Level and Perception of Susceptibility and Severity of COVID-19 on Stay-at-Home Preventive Behavior in a Group of Older Adults in Mexico City. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldassarre, A.; Giorgi, G.; Alessio, F.; Lulli, L.G.; Arcangeli, G.; Mucci, N. Stigma and Discrimination (SAD) at the Time of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dryhurst, S.; Schneider, C.R.; Kerr, J.; Freeman, A.L.J.; Recchia, G.; van der Bles, A.M.; Spiegelhalter, D.; van der Linden, S. Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world. J. Risk Res. 2020, 23, 994–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wise, T.; Zbozinek, T.D.; Michelini, G.; Hagan, C.C.; Mobbs, D. Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2020, 7, 200742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, R.; Blumberg, S.J.; Brick, J.M.; Couper, M.P.; Courtright, M.; Dennis, J.M.; Dillman, D.; Frankel, M.R.; Garland, P. Research Synthesis: AAPOR Report on Online Panels. Public Opin. Q. 2010, 74, 711–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Unweighted n (%) | Weighted n (%) | |
---|---|---|
Sociodemographic characteristics | ||
Sex | ||
Males | 2138 (43.7) | 2295 (47.1) |
Females | 2753 (56.3) | 2583 (52.9) |
Age group, years | ||
18–24 | 219 (4.5) | 416 (8.5) |
25–44 | 2449 (50.1) | 1581 (32.4) |
45–64 | 2013 (41.2) | 1839 (37.7) |
65 or above | 210 (4.3) | 1041 (21.3) |
Education | ||
Secondary or below | 659 (13.6) | 3183 (65.7) |
Postsecondary | 4199 (86.4) | 1662 (34.3) |
Household monthly income per person | ||
Lower | 1270 (29.8) | 2201 (52.6) |
Higher | 2986 (70.2) | 1986 (47.4) |
Housing | ||
Rent | 1603 (33.9) | 1744 (36.6) |
Owned | 3120 (66.1) | 3025 (63.4) |
Socioeconomic score | ||
Low | 790 (18.9) | 2160 (52.3) |
Middle | 1497 (35.8) | 1376 (33.3) |
High | 1891 (45.3) | 595 (14.4) |
Perceived benefits | ||
Family physical health (any of the following) | 1036 (22.7) | 873 (19.0) |
Improved family hygiene | 934 (20.4) | 820 (17.8) |
Improved family physical health | 605 (13.3) | 499 (10.9) |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 370 (8.2) | 330 (7.2) |
Decreased family negative emotion | 80 (1.8) | 94 (2.1) |
Increased family positive emotion | 192 (4.2) | 234 (5.1) |
Increased family happiness | 240 (5.3) | 184 (4.0) |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 750 (16.5) | 619 (13.5) |
Increased family harmony | 403 (8.8) | 363 (7.9) |
Increased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 556 (12.2) | 486 (10.6) |
Perceived harms | ||
Poorer family physical health | 129 (2.9) | 104 (2.3) |
Decreased family income | 1447 (32.6) | 1671 (37.8) |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 1626 (36.9) | 1669 (37.9) |
Increased family negative emotion | 1437 (32.6) | 1465 (33.3) |
Decreased family happiness | 738 (16.7) | 837 (18.9) |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 864 (19.6) | 819 (18.6) |
Decreased family harmony | 508 (11.5) | 521 (11.8) |
Decreased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 113 (2.5) | 101 (2.3) |
Increased family conflicts | 677 (15.3) | 594 (13.4) |
Sex | Age (Years) | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 18–24 | 25–44 | 45–64 | 65 or Above | ||||
n (%) | n (%) | p value | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | p value | p value for trend | |
Perceived benefits | |||||||||
Family physical health (any of the following) | 412 (20.8) | 624 (24.2) | 0.006 | 46 (23.0) | 528 (23.2) | 407 (21.5) | 55 (27.9) | 0.19 | 0.93 |
Improved family hygiene | 374 (18.8) | 560 (21.7) | 0.02 | 45 (22.5) | 481 (21.1) | 355 (18.8) | 53 (26.9) | 0.024 | 0.57 |
Improved family physical health | 251 (12.6) | 354 (13.7) | 0.29 | 28 (14.0) | 279 (12.2) | 262 (13.9) | 36 (18.3) | 0.069 | 0.04 |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 138 (7.0) | 232 (9.0) | 0.01 | 16 (8.0) | 152 (6.7) | 173 (9.2) | 29 (14.7) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Decreased family negative emotion | 35 (1.8) | 45 (1.8) | 0.96 | 4 (2.0) | 28 (1.2) | 43 (2.3) | 5 (2.5) | 0.057 | 0.03 |
Increased family positive emotion | 75 (3.8) | 117 (4.6) | 0.21 | 9 (4.5) | 54 (2.4) | 106 (5.7) | 23 (11.9) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Increased family happiness | 91 (4.6) | 149 (5.8) | 0.07 | 10 (5.0) | 115 (5.1) | 103 (5.5) | 12 (6.1) | 0.89 | 0.44 |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 281 (14.2) | 469 (18.2) | <0.001 | 32 (16.0) | 328 (14.4) | 345 (18.3) | 45 (23.1) | 0.001 | <0.001 |
Increased family harmony | 154 (7.8) | 249 (9.7) | 0.02 | 16 (8.0) | 162 (7.1) | 194 (10.3) | 31 (15.9) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Increased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 213 (10.7) | 343 (13.3) | 0.008 | 23 (11.5) | 230 (10.1) | 267 (14.1) | 36 (18.3) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Perceived harms | |||||||||
Poorer family physical health | 57 (3.0) | 72 (2.9) | 0.85 | 10 (5.0) | 60 (2.7) | 56 (3.1) | 3 (1.6) | 0.20 | 0.38 |
Decreased family income | 650 (33.7) | 797 (31.8) | 0.17 | 75 (37.3) | 725 (32.8) | 598 (32.6) | 49 (25.9) | 0.12 | 0.09 |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 750 (39.3) | 876 (35.1) | 0.005 | 65 (32.3) | 828 (37.7) | 672 (37.0) | 61 (32.3) | 0.25 | 0.76 |
Increased family negative emotion | 659 (34.4) | 778 (31.1) | 0.02 | 60 (29.9) | 733 (33.2) | 588 (32.4) | 56 (29.6) | 0.59 | 0.64 |
Decreased family happiness | 362 (18.9) | 376 (15.0) | 0.001 | 31 (15.4) | 388 (17.6) | 287 (15.7) | 32 (16.9) | 0.43 | 0.37 |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 343 (17.9) | 521 (20.9) | 0.013 | 57 (28.4) | 522 (23.7) | 267 (14.6) | 18 (9.6) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Decreased family harmony | 236 (12.3) | 272 (10.9) | 0.15 | 35 (17.4) | 307 (13.9) | 157 (8.6) | 9 (4.8) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Decreased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 52 (2.7) | 61 (2.4) | 0.57 | 10 (5.0) | 53 (2.4) | 43 (2.6) | 2 (1.1) | 0.082 | 0.18 |
Increased family conflicts | 250 (13.0) | 427 (17.0) | <0.001 | 47 (23.4) | 424 (19.2) | 193 (10.5) | 13 (6.9) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Socioeconomic Score | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low (0–1) | Middle (2) | High (3) | |||
n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | p value | p value for trend | |
Perceived benefits | |||||
Family physical health (any of the following) | 129 (17.5) | 334 (23.7) | 434 (24.4) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Improved family hygiene | 121 (16.3) | 298 (21.1) | 390 (21.9) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
Improved family physical health | 76 (10.3) | 183 (13.0) | 264 (14.8) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 41 (5.6) | 125 (8.9) | 156 (8.8) | 0.014 | 0.021 |
Decreased family negative emotion | 13 (1.8) | 24 (1.7) | 29 (1.6) | 0.97 | 0.81 |
Increased family positive emotion | 28 (3.8) | 59 (4.2) | 81 (4.6) | 0.67 | 0.37 |
Increased family happiness | 21 (2.8) | 80 (5.7) | 105 (5.9) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 83 (11.3) | 244 (17.4) | 330 (18.6) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Increased family harmony | 39 (5.3) | 137 (9.7) | 176 (9.9) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Increased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 71 (9.6) | 173 (12.3) | 242 (13.6) | 0.02 | 0.006 |
Perceived harms | |||||
Poorer family physical health | 25 (3.5) | 39 (2.8) | 40 (2.3) | 0.24 | 0.091 |
Decreased family income | 294 (41.0) | 447 (32.5) | 476 (27.4) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Family mental health (any of the following) | 270 (38.0) | 498 (36.4) | 614 (35.6) | 0.54 | 0.28 |
Increased family negative emotion | 241 (33.9) | 441 (32.2) | 533 (30.9) | 0.33 | 0.14 |
Decreased family happiness | 135 (18.9) | 226 (16.4) | 257 (14.8) | 0.04 | 0.01 |
Family relationship (any of the following) | 159 (22.3) | 248 (18.1) | 324 (18.7) | 0.051 | 0.096 |
Decreased family harmony | 93 (13.0) | 150 (10.9) | 174 (10.0) | 0.10 | 0.04 |
Decreased family’s ability to cope with difficulties | 21 (2.9) | 40 (2.9) | 30 (1.7) | 0.06 | 0.03 |
Increased family conflicts | 121 (16.9) | 191 (13.9) | 264 (15.2) | 0.18 | 0.53 |
Family Physical Health | Family Mental Health | Family Relationship | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | |
Sex | ||||||
Males (ref) | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
Females | 1.25 (1.07, 1.45) | 0.004 | 1.44 (1.13, 1.82) | 0.003 | 1.44 (1.21, 1.72) | <0.001 |
Age group (years) | ||||||
18–24 (ref) | 1 | 0.04 * | 1 | <0.001 * | 1 | <0.001 * |
25–44 | 0.97 (0.65, 1.45) | 0.90 | 0.83 (0.45, 1.54) | 0.56 | 0.89 (0.56, 1.41) | 0.61 |
45–64 | 0.87 (0.58, 1.30) | 0.50 | 1.00 (0.54, 1.86) | 0.99 | 1.14 (0.71, 1.81) | 0.59 |
65 or above | 1.45 (0.87, 2.40) | 0.15 | 2.40 (1.17, 4.92) | 0.02 | 1.87 (1.06, 3.31) | 0.03 |
Socioeconomic score | ||||||
Low (ref) | 1 | <0.001 * | 1 | 0.006 * | 1 | <0.001 * |
Middle | 1.49 (1.19, 1.87) | 0.001 | 1.72 (1.19, 2.48) | 0.004 | 1.71 (1.30, 2.23) | <0.001 |
High | 1.57 (1.26, 1.96) | <0.001 | 1.76 (1.23, 2.51) | 0.002 | 1.89 (1.45, 2.45) | <0.001 |
Family Physical Health | Family Mental Health | Family Relationship | Family Income | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | Adj. OR (95% CI) | p Value | |
Sex | ||||||||
Males (ref) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
Females | 0.89 (0.60, 1.32) | 0.57 | 0.81 (0.71, 0.93) | 0.002 | 1.07 (0.91, 1.26) | 0.43 | 0.90 (0.78, 1.03) | 0.13 |
Age group (years) | ||||||||
18–24 (ref) | 1 | 0.81 * | 1 | 0.32 * | 1 | <0.001 * | 1 | 0.04 * |
25–44 | 0.85 (0.33, 2.17) | 0.73 | 1.23 (0.86, 1.75) | 0.26 | 0.74 (0.51, 1.06) | 0.10 | 0.86 (0.61, 1.22) | 0.40 |
45–64 | 0.92 (0.36, 2.36) | 0.86 | 1.22 (0.85, 1.74) | 0.28 | 0.41 (0.28, 0.60) | <0.001 | 0.84 (0.59, 1.19) | 0.32 |
65 or above | 0.53 (0.12, 2.27) | 0.39 | 0.94 (0.59, 1.51) | 0.80 | 0.24 (0.13, 0.46) | <0.001 | 0.52 (0.32, 0.85) | 0.008 |
Socioeconomic score | ||||||||
Low (ref) | 1 | 0.23 * | 1 | 0.38 * | 1 | 0.053 * | 1 | <0.001 * |
Middle | 0.80 (0.48, 1.34) | 0.39 | 0.91 (0.76, 1.10) | 0.35 | 0.76 (0.61, 0.96) | 0.02 | 0.69 (0.57, 0.83) | <0.001 |
High | 0.64 (0.38, 1.07) | 0.09 | 0.88 (0.73, 1.06) | 0.17 | 0.80 (0.64, 0.99) | 0.04 | 0.53 (0.45, 0.64) | <0.001 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wong, B.Y.-M.; Lam, T.-H.; Lai, A.Y.-K.; Wang, M.P.; Ho, S.-Y. Perceived Benefits and Harms of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Family Well-Being and Their Sociodemographic Disparities in Hong Kong: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031217
Wong BY-M, Lam T-H, Lai AY-K, Wang MP, Ho S-Y. Perceived Benefits and Harms of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Family Well-Being and Their Sociodemographic Disparities in Hong Kong: A Cross-Sectional Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(3):1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031217
Chicago/Turabian StyleWong, Bonny Yee-Man, Tai-Hing Lam, Agnes Yuen-Kwan Lai, Man Ping Wang, and Sai-Yin Ho. 2021. "Perceived Benefits and Harms of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Family Well-Being and Their Sociodemographic Disparities in Hong Kong: A Cross-Sectional Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 3: 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031217