Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 28;9(1):264–270. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_732_19

Table 3.

Distribution of adolescent girls based on their GHQ score and sociodemographic characteristics

Sociodemographic factors GHQ score X2, df, P

≥3 <3
Type of school n=362 n=380 χ2=17.768,
df=2, P<0.001
 Aided 94 (26.0) 154 (40.5)
 Government 151 (41.7) 124 (32.6)
 Private 117 (32.3) 102 (26.8)
Age group
 10-13 (early adolescents) 79 (21.9) 128 (34.0) χ2=16.357,
df=2, P<0.000
 14-15 (Middle adolescents) 138 (38.2) 103 (27.3)
 16-19 (Late adolescents) 144 (39.9) 146 (36.7)
Class
 Board 144 (39.8) 132 (34.7) χ2=2.018, df=1,
P=0.155
 Non-board 218 (60.2) 248 (65.3)
Type of family χ2 3.628, df=1,
P<0.05
 Nuclear 248 (68.5) 235 (61.8)
 Joint 114 (31.5) 145 (38.2)
Mother’s education
 Less than primary 238 (65.7) 209 (55.0) χ2=14.077,
df=2, P=0.001
 Up to class 12th 84 (23.3) 136 (35.8)
 Graduate and above 40 (11.0) 35 (9.2)
Father’s education
 Less than primary 176 (48.6) 141 (37.1) χ2=15.544,
df=2, P=0.0001
 Up to class 12th 134 (37.0) 146 (38.4)
 Graduate and above 52 (14.4) 93 (24.5)
Mother’s working status
 Not working 273 (45.7) 325 (54.3) χ2=12.120,
df=1, P=0.001
 Working 89 (61.8) 55 (38.2)