139. Youths And Poor Emotional Well-Being, Is It Just A Matter of Stress?

Abstract

The aim of our study was to assess factors influencing emotional well-being among youths over a two-year period. Data were obtained from the T1 and T3 waves of the GenerationFRee study during the 2015-16 and 2017-18 school years. Students aged 15 to 24 years in post-mandatory education were invited to participate in a web-based self-administered anonymous questionnaire aiming to assess their lifestyles. Using the WHO-Five Well-Being Index with a result < 13/25 indicating a poor emotional well-being (WB), the sample (N=1311) was divided into four groups according to the evolution of their WB: (1) good at T1 and T3 (GT1T3 : 67.94%), (2) good at T1 and poor at T3 (GT1PT3 : 13.21%), (3) poor at T1 and good at T3 (PT1GT3 : 8.44%), (4) poor at T1 and T3 (PT1T3 : 10.41%). Groups were compared on gender, age, chronic condition, academic track, socioeconomic status, family structure, perceived health status, stress level, relationships with their parents, and academic success. Significant (p<0.5) variables at the bivariate level were included in a multinomial regression analysis using GT1T3 as the reference category. Results are given as relative risks ratios (RRR). At the bivariate level, groups differed in gender, age, family structure, perceived health status, reporting a chronic condition, advanced puberty, socioeconomic status, stress level and relationship with parents. In the multivariate analysis, youths in the GT1PT3 group, compared to GT1T3, were more likely to report a chronic condition (RRR 2.15), more stress at T3 (RRR 1.44) and poor perceived health status at T3 (RRR 5.87). No differences were found at T1. Those in the PT1GT3 group were older (RRR 1.15), had a poorer relationship with their mother at T1 (RRR 0.74) (no difference at T3), and reported stress at T1 (RRR 1.36). Finally, those in the PT1T3 were less likely to report a disrupted family structure (RRR 0.44), but more likely to report a worse relationship with their father at T1 (RRR 0.81), more stress at T1 (RRR 1.34) and T3 (RRR 1.43), as well as poor perceived health status at T1 (RRR 5.84) and T3 (RRR 8.33). Youths’ emotional well-being is complex and can be influenced by multiple factors. Using a longitudinal approach, we have highlighted that the level of stress is considerable, especially among those who continue to report a poor well-being over time. Moreover, stress seems to be independent from gender or academic success. Additionally, reporting a poor health perception is also associated to poorer levels of emotional well-being (at T3). Finally, our results also underline the importance of the relationship with parents. Inquiring about stress could be a good proxy for emotional well-being. This approach could be especially useful among males who usually tend to underestimate their emotional worries.