Asian J Kinesiol Search

CLOSE


Asian J Kinesiol > Volume 27(3); 2025 > Article
Park and Kim: Factors Affecting the Health-Related Quality of Life of Korean Adult Workers: An Analysis by Age Group

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify factors influencing the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of adult workers in South Korea, and to provide evidence-based insights for developing health promotion policies targeting working adults in a rapidly changing social environment.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the health survey component of the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES), provided by the National Statistical Office. A total of 1,365 office workers aged 19 to 60 years (mean age = 41.04 ± 11.23; 646 men and 719 women) were included. Following guidelines for complex sample design, frequency analyses, group difference tests, and multiple regression analyses were conducted using SPSS version 24.0.

RESULTS

Individual characteristics such as gender, age, and employment type were found to significantly affect HRQoL, as well as related factors including psychological and physical health, healthy eating habits, sleep time, and physical activity. In particular, psychological and physical health, along with physical activity, were confirmed as major predictors of HRQoL(R2=0.254~0.282). Age-specific variations in these influencing factors were also observed (20’s: psychological health, 30’s: psychological health, physical activity, health eating habits, 40’s: psychological and physical health and physical activity, 50’: psychological health, physical activity), highlighting the importance of tailored intervention strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult office workers play a critical role in the functioning and development of society. Improving their HRQoL is essential not only for individual well-being but also for national productivity and sustainability. The findings suggest that intervention strategies should consider both the psychological dimensions of health and the differing needs across age groups to effectively promote a healthier working population.

Introduction

Modern society is characterized by a duality in which the benefits of advanced science and technology—namely, increased convenience in daily life—coexist with negative consequences such as job insecurity and social isolation. In response to this complex social climate, there has been growing interest across diverse fields in strategies to enhance the quality of life for individuals, particularly within the domains of health and medical research [1].
Recognizing the importance of improving individual well-being, many countries have initiated national-level efforts, including the adoption of flexible work systems and telecommuting practices [2]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, technological advancements in digital platforms and artificial intelligence facilitated remote work and minimized physical contact. However, these same developments have also replaced or reduced the roles of human workers, contributing to increased employment uncertainty [3]. Such negative impacts can lead to psychological distress and maladaptive behaviors among workers, highlighting the need to increase awareness of these challenges and explore appropriate interventions [4].
Furthermore, previous research has shown that subjective health status is significantly affected by variables such as gender, age, type of employment, and socioeconomic status [5]. Accordingly, when seeking practical solutions to improve quality of life, it is essential to consider the demographic and occupational characteristics of the target population [6]. However, most previous studies have revealed that there are differences in variables depending on individual characteristics, but there are insufficient studies that show how they differ according to individual characteristics in detail.
Also, Quality of life is a multidimensional construct encompassing physical, psychological, and social domains, and it is generally regarded as an individual’s perceived state of well-being [7]. In this context, quality of life may be understood as the overall condition of one’s physical and mental health [8], as well as access to proper nutrition and sufficient sleep [9]. In addition, interpersonal relationships [10] and the broader socio-economic environment [11] also play critical roles in shaping one’s well-being.
While it is meaningful to analyze general factors affecting quality of life, a more effective approach involves examining these influences in conjunction with specific individual characteristics, such as gender, age, employment status, income level, and marital status. Further research is needed to clarify where and how such differences manifest across subgroups. According to Baltes [12], the factors that influence an individual’s health perception and behavior are not constant throughout the lifespan, as individuals undergo psychological and physiological changes with age. On the other hand, Prochaska and colleagues [13], who proposed the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change, emphasized that human behavioral changes occur in distinct stages, and the influencing factors can vary significantly across those stages. Therefore, a tailored analytical approach may provide more actionable and effective insights for improving quality of life across diverse populations. In South Korea, the adult suicide rate remains the highest among countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) [14]. Suicide is widely recognized as both a personal and societal health indicator [15], and has been closely associated with anxiety and reduced quality of life [16]. Given this alarming national context, it is imperative to assess the health conditions of adult workers—key members of society—and to identify the factors that impact their well-being as a foundation for designing effective intervention strategies.
Therefore, the present study aims to examine differences in health-related quality of life, psychological and physical health, dietary habits, sleep duration, and physical activity among Korean adult workers according to gender, age, employment type (regular vs. non-regular), income level, and marital status. Furthermore, this study seeks to identify key factors influencing their health-related quality of life.

Methods

Participants

This study aims to identify the differences in factors affecting the health of Korean adult workers based on their gender, age, employment type, income level, and marital status, as well as to explore the factors influencing their quality of life. To achieve this objective, a secondary analysis was conducted using the raw data from the National Health and Nutrition Survey administered by the National Statistical Office of Korea. The data utilized for the analysis pertains to the year 2022 and focuses on office workers aged 19 to 60. A total of 1,365 individuals (mean age = 41.04 ± 11.23) were included in the analysis, all of whom were office workers aged 19 to 60 with no missing values for the measured variables <Figure 1>. The specific characteristics of the subjects are presented in <Table 1>.

Measures

General characteristics

The demographic information necessary for this study, including gender, age, educational background (below high school graduation, university graduation or higher), employment type (permanent, temporary), marital status (unmarried, married), and income level (low, lower-middle, upper-middle, high), was obtained through a health survey. For the age variable, participants aged 19 to 60, suitable for adult workers, were selected and recoded into categories of their 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s for analysis.

Health-related quality of life

To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL), a Korean-specific measurement tool, HINT-8(Korean Health-Related Quality of Life Instrument with Eight Items) [17], was employed. This instrument was developed to reflect cultural differences in HRQOL assessment [18] and consists of eight items encompassing physical, social, mental, and positive health domains: stair climbing, pain, energy, work, depression, memory, sleep, and happiness. Respondents rated their health status over the past week using a four-point Likert scale.
The responses were converted into the HINT-8 index using the scoring algorithm presented in <Table 1>. The index values range from 0.132 to 1.000, where higher scores indicate better perceived health status, and lower scores represent poorer health status [19].

Psychological health

The Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) was utilized to measure psychological health, as it is a widely used tool for effectively assessing anxiety disorders in a brief period [20]. This instrument employs a four-point Likert scale (0 = “not at all disturbed” to 3 = “almost daily disturbed”) and consists of a total of seven items. The responses yield a score ranging from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating greater levels of anxiety.

Physical health

In this paper, the prevalence of chronic diseases was assessed as a measure of physical health. Definitions of chronic diseases vary, and a complete consensus among experts on the classification of chronic diseases has yet to be achieved. The World Health Organization [21] classifies heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and chronic lung disease as chronic diseases. In this study, a diagnosis from a physician indicates the presence of a chronic disease, and the overall prevalence of chronic diseases was determined accordingly.

Healthy eating habits

To evaluate the healthy eating habits of the participants, this study employed the Korean Healthy Eating Index (KHEI), which was specifically developed for Korean adults [22]. The KHEI consists of 14 items: eight components assess the adequacy of recommended food and nutrient intake, three components evaluate the moderation of foods and nutrients that should be limited, and three components examine the balance of energy intake.
The total score ranges from 0 to 100, with each component weighted according to its importance. The scoring system was developed by adapting the framework of the U.S. Healthy Eating Index (HEI) [23] to reflect dietary patterns and health concerns relevant to the Korean population.

Sleep time

This study utilized public data that included weekday sleep times, wake-up times, as well as weekend bedtimes and wake-up times. Based on this data, the average sleep duration (in minutes) was calculated and employed for the research. To assess sleep quality, the study used the weekly average sleep duration.

Physical activity

Among the methods for measuring physical activity, the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ), developed by the World Health Organization (WHO), consists of a total of 16 questions and can assess physical activity across three domains: work-related activities, leisure activities, and transportation activities [24]. The GPAQ is a standardized questionnaire utilized in 50 countries, and the Korean version has been translated and validated for reliability and validity, making it applicable in various studies [25]. This study utilized the GPAQ to assess the physical activity of the participants.
The GPAQ categorizes high-intensity and moderate-intensity activities performed for at least 10 minutes into leisure activities, work, and transportation, prompting respondents to indicate how many days per week they engaged in these activities, as well as the average duration in hours and minutes. Based on the collected data, physical activities in the three domains of work, leisure, and transportation are calculated in terms of metabolic equivalent of task-minutes per week (MET-min/week), providing a comprehensive measure of total physical activity <Table 2>.

Ethical Considerations

The researchers obtained raw data after securing approval from the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the purpose of the study. They submitted the research objectives and methodology to the Institutional Bioethics Committee of their affiliated institution for review, received an exemption (approval number: 2025-0014), and conducted the analysis using data that could not identify individuals.

Statistical Analysis

According to the guidelines for using raw data from the National Health and Nutrition Survey, the demographic, psychological health, and physical health factors of the subjects were analyzed using the complex sampling method in SPSS 24.0. To obtain unbiased estimates from the sample data collected in the National Health and Nutrition Survey, this study considered weights, stratification variables, and cluster variables, applying the health survey, examination, and nutrition survey weight variable (wt_tot) in our analysis.
The quality of life, physical health, and psychological health of office workers were assessed through complex sample statistical analysis, which provided estimates and standard errors. An average difference test using the complex sample general linear model was conducted to compare differences among variables, including quality of life based on the general characteristics of the subjects.
Additionally, we identified statistically significant variables and performed a regression analysis using the complex sample general linear model (CSGLM) to examine the factors influencing the quality of life of office workers. The selection of input variables for the regression model was guided by prior difference tests and correlation analysis. Based on the correlation analysis, variables significantly associated with quality of life were included in the model using the ‘enter’ method.
Prior to conducting the regression analysis, key statistical assumptions were examined. Normality of residuals was assessed using histograms and Q–Q plots. Linearity was evaluated by inspecting residuals versus predicted values. Multicollinearity was examined using Variance Inflation Factors (VIFs), and all values were below the commonly accepted threshold of 10(1.007~1.016), indicating no significant multicollinearity issues.

Results

The results of this study are presented from two perspectives. First, the study identifies differences in several variables—health-related quality of life, psychological health, physical health, healthy eating habits, sleep time, physical activity — according to participants’ characteristics, including gender, age, educational level, employment type, marital status, and income level. Second, based on the previous analysis, health-related quality of life was found to differ significantly by gender, age, and employment type. Accordingly, additional analyses were conducted to determine the factors influencing quality of life within each of these demographic groups.

Differences by Characteristics

<Table 3> presents the estimated frequencies of the subjects’ general characteristics, taking into account the applied weights. It can be observed that the estimated frequencies, after considering the weights, differ somewhat from the frequencies presented in the data.
<Table 3> also indicates whether there are differences in variables based on the characteristic of the subjects. Firstly, it was found that men have a higher health-related quality of life compared to women (t=5.996, p<0.001). Additionally, individuals in their 20s exhibited a higher health-related quality of life than those in older age groups (F=5.136, p=0.002). Furthermore, permanent position workers reported a higher health-related quality of life than temporary position workers (t=3.968, p=0.048).
The GAD-7, which was administered to assess psychological health, revealed that women exhibited higher anxiety levels than men (t=14.834, p<0.001). Among age groups, those in their 30s displayed the highest levels of anxiety, while individuals in their 50s reported lower levels of anxiety (F=9.045, p<0.001). Additionally, individuals with a college degree or higher were found to have elevated anxiety levels (t=5.818, p=0.017).
The incidence of chronic diseases, measured to assess physical health, was found to be higher in men than in women (t=14.615, p<0.001). Additionally, individuals in their 50s exhibited a higher incidence of chronic diseases (F=33.19, p<0.001), and those with a high school education also showed a greater incidence (t=7.82, p=0.006). Furthermore, it was observed that the higher income group had a greater prevalence of chronic diseases compared to the lower income group (F=3.218, p=0.024). Those in their 50s were identified as having the healthiest dietary habits (F=19.097, p<0.001), while individuals in their 20s reported the longest average sleep duration of eight hours (F=8.801, p<0.001). Lastly, physical activity levels were found to be higher in men than in women (t=5.864, p<0.001).

Factors Affecting Health-Related Quality of Life

Based on the results indicating significant differences in health-related quality of life according to gender, employment type, and age, regression analyses were conducted to identify the variables influencing quality of life within each subgroup. <Table 4> presents the factors influencing health-related quality of life based on gender, employment type, and age group. Regardless of gender or employment type, psychological and physical health, as well as physical activity, were found to significantly impact the health-related quality of life of the study participants, with explanatory power ranging from 25.4% to 28.2%.
Specifically, for men, psychological health, physical activity, and physical health explained 25.4% of the variance in healthrelated quality of life. Among these factors, anxiety—an indicator of psychological health—had the strongest negative impact on health-related quality of life. In contrast, physical activity had a positive effect, while the presence of chronic diseases—an indicator of physical health—had a negative impact on healthrelated quality of life.
For women, psychological health, physical health, and physical activity explained 28.2% of the variance in healthrelated quality of life. Unlike men, physical health was found to have a greater impact than physical activity.
In the analysis by employment type, psychological health, physical health, and physical activity explained 26.4% of the variance in health-related quality of life among permanent position workers, with psychological health showing a particularly strong negative impact.
Among temporary position workers, the same three factors—psychological health, physical health, and physical activity—accounted for 28.2% of the variance. Psychological health had the strongest negative influence, followed by physical activity with a relatively higher positive effect, and then physical health.
Higher levels of GAD-7 scores and the presence of chronic diseases—used to assess psychological and physical health by gender and employment type—were found to have significant negative effects on health-related quality of life. In contrast, higher levels of physical activity were associated with a positive effect on health-related quality of life.
However, we observed somewhat different trends depending on age. It was confirmed that psychological factors alone have a statistically significant negative impact on the quality of healthrelated life in individuals in their 20s (R²=31.7%, F=103.874, p<0.001). In the 30s age group, psychological factors (F=66.457, p<0.001) also had a negative impact, while physical activity (F=5.978, p=0.016) and a healthy diet (F=6.218, p=0.014) had positive effects, resulting in an overall explanatory power of 38.6%. The 40s age group showed that psychological factors (F=22.65, p<0.001), physical factors (F=5.441, p=0.021), and physical activity (F=5.623, p=0.019) influenced their healthrelated quality of life, with an explanatory power of 25.4%. Lastly, in the 50s age group, psychological factors (F=70.000, p<0.001) showed a negative effect, while physical activity (F=6.626, p=0.011) had a statistically significant positive effect on healthrelated quality of life, with an explanatory power of 26.5%.

Discussion

This study aimed to identify factors affecting the HRQoL among adult workers and to examine differences based on the characteristics of the subjects. The following discussion is based on the results of the analysis conducted for this research purpose. Firstly, differences were observed in HRQoL, psychological health variables (anxiety), physical health variables (degree of chronic disease), and physical activity based on the gender of workers. A study by Kaplan and his colleagues [26] reported that while women have longer lifespans than men, they experience more physical and psychological illnesses. Since then, numerous studies have indicated that there are differences in HRQoL based on gender [27]. In addition to adult populations, many studies have shown that women tend to have a lower HRQoL compared to men across various disease conditions and among older adult groups [28].
Anxiety, a psychological health factor, is found to be higher in women than in men; however, the incidence of chronic diseases is greater in men than in women, and physical activity levels are significantly higher in men. Additionally, when examining the values of variables by age, individuals in their 50s exhibit a lower quality of life. Although this group demonstrates more positive and healthier eating habits compared to other groups, they also experience a higher incidence of chronic diseases and shorter average sleep time. Numerous studies have reported that women have a higher incidence of chronic diseases than men, along with elevated psychological health factors such as anxiety, and lower levels of physical activity [29, 30]. However, in the context of Korea, it is essential to confirm that men in adulthood, excluding the elderly, have a higher prevalence of major chronic diseases related to the cardiovascular system compared to women [31]. Furthermore, considering that the prevalence of chronic diseases significantly impacts HRQoL [32], this suggests that multiple factors collectively influence HRQoL.
Conversely, the research findings indicate that HRQoL varies based on gender, age, and employment type. In light of these characteristics, we aimed to identify the factors influencing their quality of life. The results revealed differences in influence among men, women, permanent position worker, and temporary position worker; however, psychological health, physical health, and physical activity were found to significantly impact their HRQoL. As noted by Gabriella and Martin [33], there is a growing crisis in the psychological health of adult workers amidst the rapid changes in their lives, with anxiety exerting a substantial influence on HRQoL. Additionally, these findings support previous research indicating that regular physical activity positively affects HRQoL [34].
However, the analysis of factors affecting HRQoL by age revealed that these influencing factors varied across different age groups. For individuals in their 20s, only psychological health factors were found to impact HRQoL. In contrast, those in their 30s experienced influences from psychological health factors, physical activity, and a healthy eating habits. For individuals in their 40s, both psychological and physical health factors, along with physical activity, were significant influences. Meanwhile, adult workers in their 50s showed that psychological health factors and physical activity were the primary determinants of HRQoL. It is important to note that while several factors have been identified as influencing HRQoL, it may be misleading to assert that only a few are significant. A study focusing on individuals in their twenties indicated that they do not perceive the presence of chronic diseases as particularly important [35]. This age group, typically at the peak of their physical and mental development, often lacks awareness of the need for healthpromoting behaviors due to the absence of noticeable healththreatening symptoms [36]. Even in cases where individuals are in preclinical stages of chronic illness—such as pre-hypertension or pre-diabetes—they often fail to recognize the seriousness of these conditions and the importance of adopting healthy behaviors. Consequently, the presence of chronic disease or levels of physical activity may not significantly influence the HRQoL among individuals in their twenties. Nevertheless, continuous research using diverse methodologies is necessary to further explore this relationship. Importantly, HRQoL appears to vary by age group, highlighting the need to consider age-specific differences in influencing factors when developing strategies to enhance individual HRQoL.
It is also important to note that psychological health variables significantly impact the HRQoL. This study demonstrates that psychological health variables exert a substantial influence on the HRQoL of workers across various circumstances. As Larsson and his colleagues [37] noted, individuals in society can experience emotional loneliness; this underscores the importance of psychological health in modern society, where personalized networks are prevalent.
Just as a healthy population is crucial for a nation, a healthy workforce is essential for a company. Given the research [38] indicating that organizations prioritizing employee health and safety are better positioned to attract and retain top-performing talent, the findings of this study warrant discussion from a social perspective.
These findings highlight the need for organizational-level health strategies that move beyond physical health promotion to also address psychological well-being. For example, workplace wellness initiatives could incorporate regular mental health screenings, employee assistance programs, and stress management workshops to support workers’ psychological health. Such comprehensive programs not only enhance employees’ HRQoL but may also improve job satisfaction, productivity, and employee retention. Therefore, organizations should consider tailoring their wellness programs to address age- and role-specific psychological risk factors within their workforce.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

This study, based on survey data collected at the national level, examined HRQoL of workers and identified factors that influence this quality among adult worker. However, while the cross-sectional data is useful for identifying phenomena, it does not allow for an examination of causal processes. Therefore, future research utilizing longitudinal data could provide meaningful insights into how these influencing factors change with age. Additionally, this study only measures psychological health variables in terms of anxiety as a negative factor. Considering positive psychological variables can also help develop effective intervention strategies or programs that reduce stress and promote positive behavior by improving understanding of the impact of psychological HRQoL.
For a more comprehensive and balanced view of mental health, future studies should also include positive psychological components such as resilience, optimism, or subjective well-being. Positive variables are inferred to be associated with better coping, higher life satisfaction, and improved health-related quality of life, as they also mitigate the influence of negative psychology. Thus, including both negative and positive aspects of psychological functioning will allow us to identify risk factors as well as protective factors, which will contribute to more holistic and strength-based mental health intervention design.
Moreover, in order to gain deeper insight into the lived experiences, emotional contexts, and meaning-making processes of working adults, qualitative or mixed-methods approaches should be considered in future research. Such methodologies can uncover nuanced perspectives that quantitative surveys may overlook, particularly in understanding how individuals subjectively perceive and manage their psychological health and work-related quality of life. Incorporating in-depth interviews, focus groups, or narrative analyses may thus enrich the interpretation of statistical findings and guide the development of more person-centered and contextually relevant interventions.

Conclusions

This study identified that anxiety, a psychological factor, significantly impacts the HRQoL of adult workers. Additionally, the degree of chronic disease prevalence and physical activity, which were used as indicators of physical health, also exerted an influence. It was further observed that the factors affecting HRQoL vary by age.
Adult workers are key members of society in many respects, and their HRQoL plays a crucial role in fostering a healthy nation. Therefore, it is essential to develop targeted strategies for this demographic. In particular, strategies should be tailored to address the distinct factors affecting different age groups. Furthermore, given the strong influence of psychological health on HRQoL, it is imperative to explore and implement methods to enhance their psychological well-being.

Notes

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at www.ajkinesiol.org,

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the National Statistical Office of Korea for granting permission to use the data, as well as to the respondents who participated in the survey of the raw data.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to report regarding the present study.

Figure 1.
Flowchart of participant selection process.
ajk-2025-27-3-124f1.jpg
Table 1.
Index calculation of HINT-8
HINT-8 = 1- (0.073 + 0.018 X CL2 + 0.072 X CL3 + 0.122 X CL4
+ 0.055 X PA2 + 0.116 X PA3 + 0.188 X PA4
+ 0.019 X VI23 + 0.070 X VI4
+ 0.004 X WO2 + 0.028 X WO3 + 0.036 X WO4
+ 0.012 X DE2 + 0.044 X DE3 + 0.098 X DE4
+ 0.014 X ME2 + 0.058 X ME3 + 0.109 X ME4
+ 0.020 X SL3 + 0.090 X SL4
+ 0.014 X HA2 + 0.068 X HA3 + 0.082 X HA4)

CL: climbing, PA: pain, VI: vitality, WO: working, DE: depression, ME: memory, SL: sleep, HA: happy

Table 2.
Calculation of Physical activity
Category Calculation method
Travel – related activity 4 * events per week * minutes of activity
Work – related activity Moderate Level 4 * events per week * moderate - minutes of activity
High Level 8 * events per week * vigorous - minutes of activity)
Leisure – related activity Moderate Level 4 * events per week * moderate - minutes of activity
High Level 8 * events per week * vigorous - minutes of activity
Total (MET-min/week) travel + work + leisure related activity
Table 3.
Differences in psychological variables according to characteristics
Characteristic Categories Estimated value(frequency)
Estimated value
N B SE % Health-related quality of life
Psychological health
Physical health
Healthy eating habits
Sleep time
Physical activity
M t/F(p) M t/F(p) M t/F(p) M t/F(p) M t/F(p) M t/F(p)
Gender Male 646 9213549.92 592043.59 56.0 0.839 5.996 (<.001) 2.10 14.834 (<.001) .384 14.615 (<.001) 54.91 1.289 (.258) 457.85 1.555 (.214) 1197.80 5.864 (<.001)
Female 719 7246205.22 367793.04 44.0 0.815 2.90 .254 55.76 463.32 965.61
Age 20’s(a) 286 3987394.59 370841.92 24.2 0.839 5.136 (.002) 2.73 9.045 (<.001) .087 33.19 (<.001) 50.88 19.097 (<.001) 482.24 8.801 (<.001) 1412.77 2.141 (.097)
30’s(b) 295 4090581.73 323134.52 24.9 0.832 3.17 .189 53.14 469.72 982.40
40’s(c) 411 4558737.33 344743.86 27.7 0.825 2.44 .314 56.30 447.87 912.86
50’s(d) 373 3823041.49 300384.64 23.2 .819 1.68 .686 61.02 442.52 1018.76
Educational level ≥Highschool 559 6675362.94 434.64.77 40.6 .823 1.269 (.262) 2.28 5.818 (.017) .373 7.82 (.006) 54.98 .746 (.389) 459.18 .342 (.560) 967.87 3.147 (.078)
≤University 806 9784392.20 583538.02 59.4 .828 2.73 .265 55.69 462 1195.53
Employment type Permanent Position 810 9844896.36 574028.39 59.8 .830 3.968 (.048) 2.33 1.982 (.161) .341 1.225 (.270) 56.01 3.057 (.082) 456.66 2.707 (.102) 1084.45 .002 (.965)
Temporary position 555 6614858.72 433260.06 40.2 .821 2.68 .297 54.66 464.52 1078.95
Marital status Married 937 10537210.31 602663.99 64.0 .827 1.047 (.308) 2.46 .108 (.743) .321 .024 (.913) 56.24 2.016 (.158) 462.62 .368 (.545) 998.31 1.421 (.235)
unmarried 428 5922544.83 451864.23 36.0 .831 2.55 .317 54.43 458.55 1165.09
Income level Lower(e) 266 3042378.45 274241.49 18.5 .827 1.789 (.151) 1.99 1.532 (.209) .156 3.218 (.024) 57.31 .503 (.681) 450.46 .891 (.447) 948.23 1.349 (.260)
Middle-low(f) 343 4404062.93 339388.27 26.8 .817 2.90 .265 55.69 472.00 920.87
Middle-up(g) 365 4287584.07 354230.90 26.0 .825 2.69 .383 55.15 461.04 1104.09
High(h) 391 4725729.68 447386.25 28.7 .832 2.43 .471 53.19 458.84 1353.61
total 1365 .832 2.18 .236 56.37 456.87 1175.16
Table 4.
Regression analysis of factors influencing health-related quality of life by gender, employment type, and age group
DV Group IV B(SD) t R2 Wald F p
Health-related quality of life Male Worker (N=646) A -.011(.001) -8.7 .254 75.691 <.001
B 4.831E-5(.001) -2.685 7.211 .008
C 4.634E-6(1008E-6) 4.427 19.594 <.001
D -.001(.001) 1.424 2.027 .156
E 4.447E-5(2.812E-5) 1.397 1.953 .164
Female Worker (N=719) A -.011(.001) -9.082 .282 82.476 <.001
B -.020(.004) -5.649 31.917 <.001
C 3.696E-6(1.715E-6) 2.156 4.647 .033
D .001(.001) -.730 .533 .467
E 4.216E-5(3.377E-5) 1.248 1.558 .214
Permanent Position Worker (N=810) A -.011(.001) -9.691 .264 93.915 <.001
B -.011(.004) -3.010 9.06 .003
C 3.005E-6 2.561 6.561 .011
D -2.888E-5(<.001) -.156 .024 .876
E 3.38.E-5(3.545E-5) .954 .909 .342
Temporary Position Worker (N=555) A -.011(.001) -7.881 .282 62.109 <.001
B -.016(.005) -3.016 9.097 .003
C 6.917E-6(1.695E-6) 4.082 16.660 <.001
D 6.940E-5(.001) .321 .103 .748
E 6.904E-5(4.464E-5) 1.547 2.392 .124
20’s (N=286) A -.011(.001) -10.192 .317 103.874 <.001
B -.010(.010) -1.072 1.150 .285
C 2.589E-6(1.591E-6) 1.628 2.649 .106
D .001(.001) 1.192 1.420 .235
E 1.170E-5(4.468E-5) .262 .069 .794
30’s (N=295) A -.012(.001) -8.152 .386 66.457 <.001
B -.011(.010) -1.1 1.210 .273
C 4.351E-6(1.780E-6) 2.445 5.978 .016
D .001(.001) 2.494 6.218 .014
E .001(6.611E-5) 1.822 3.319 .070
40’s (N=411) A -.010(.002) -4.759 .254 22.65 <.001
B -.015(.006) -2.333 5.441 .021
C 5.306E-6(2.236E-6) 2.373 5.632 .019
D .001(.001) 1.294 1.675 .197
E -2.426E-5(4.976E-5) -.487 .238 .627
50’s (N=373) A -.015(.002) -8.367 .265 70.00 <.001
B -.001(.004) -.234 .055 .815
C 5.193E-6(2.017E-6) 2.574 6.626 .011
D .001(.001) -.808 .653 .420
E -3.503E-5(5.545E-5) -.632 .399 .528

DV: Dependent Variable, IV: Independent Variable, A: Psychological health, B: physical health, C: Physical activity, D: Health eating habits, E: Sleep time

References

1. Haraldstad K, Wahl A, Andenæs R, et al. A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences. Qual Life Res. 2019; 28:2641–2650.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
2. Dantas C, Mackiewics K, Tageo V, et al. Benefits and Hurdles of AI In The workplase - What Comes Next? Intern J Artif Intell Expert Syst. 2021; 10(2): 9–17.

3. Caselli M, Fracasso A, Marcolin A. et al. Technological innovations and workers’ job insecurity: the moderating role of human resource strategies. J Ind Bus Econ. 2024.

4. Bhattacharya A, Ray T. Precarious work, job stress, and health-related quality of life. Am J Ind Med. 2021; 64(4): 310–319.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
5. Bryngelson A, Bacchus Hertzman J, Fritzell J. The relationship between gender segregation in the workplace and long-term sickness absence in Sweden. Scand J Public Health. 2011; 39(6): 618–626.
crossref pmid pdf
6. Park I, Kim Y. Relationships between university students’ gender and physical activity (PA) and their exercise self-schemas, processing of PA-related information, and PA decision-making. Percept Mot Skills. 2022; 129(1): 195–209.
crossref pmid pdf
7. Lex H, Ginsburg Y, Sitzmann AF, et al. Quality of life across domains among individuals with treatment-resistant depression. J Affect Disord. 2019; 243:401–407.
crossref pmid
8. Diener E, Chan MY. Happy people live longer: subjective well‐being contributes to health and longevity. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2011; 3(1): 1–43.
crossref
9. Gherasim A, Arhire LI, Niță O, et al. The relationship between lifestyle components and dietary patterns. Proc Nutr Soc. 2020; 79(3): 311–323.
crossref pmid pmc
10. Siette J, Dodds L, Surian D, et al. Social interactions and quality of life of residents in aged care facilities: a multi-methods study. PLoS One. 2022; 17(8): e0273412.
crossref pmid pmc
11. Cui Y, Tian H, An D, et al. Quality of life and regional economic development: evidence from China. PLoS One. 2024; 19(5): e0298389.
crossref pmid pmc
12. Baltes PB. Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Dev Psychol. 1987; 23(5): 611–626.
crossref
13. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change in smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983; 51(3): 390–395.
pmid
14. Kim AM. Factors associated with the suicide rates in Korea. Psychiatry Res. 2020; 284:112745.
crossref pmid
15. Bray I, Gunnell D. Rates, life satisfaction and happiness as markers for population mental health. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2006; 41(5): 333–337.
pmid
16. Mitchell AM, Sakraida TJ, Kim Y, et al. Depression, anxiety and quality of life in suicide survivors: a comparison of close and distant relationships. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2009; 23(1): 2–10.
crossref pmid
17. Kim J, Lee HJ, Jo MW. Health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items for use in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a validation study in Korea. J Prev Med Public Health. 2022; 55(3): 234–242.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
18. Fayers P, Machin D. Quality of life: the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2007.

19. Lee J, Ahn J. A study on deriving a conversion formula using mapping between HINT-8 and EQ-5D instruments. Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2019; 25(1): 77–103.

20. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166(10): 1092–1097.
crossref pmid
21. World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases. 2024. https://www.who.int/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases. Accessed 2024 Dec 24.

22. Yook SM, Park S, Moon HK, Kim K, Shim JE, Hwang JY. Development of Korean Healthy Eating Index for adults using the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. J Nutr Health. 2015; 48(5): 419–428.
crossref
23. Krebs-Smith SM, Pannucci TE, Subar AF, Kirkpatrick SI, Lerman JL, Tooze JA, Wilson MM, Reedy J. Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2015. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2018; 118(9): 1591–1602.
crossref pmid pmc
24. Armstrong T, Bull F. Development of the World Health Organization Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). J Public Health. 2006; 14:66–70.
crossref pdf
25. Lee J, Lee C, Mi J, Kang DW, Kim JY, Yang H, Park IJ, Lee MK, Lee MY, Park I, Jekal Y, Jee SH, Jeon JY. Development of the Korean Global Physical Activity Questionnaire: reliability and validity study. Glob Health Promot. 2020; 27(3): 44–55.
crossref pmid pdf
26. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP, Wingard DL. Gender differences in health-related quality of life. Health Psychol. 1991; 10(2): 86–93.
crossref pmid
27. Cherepanov D, Palta M, Fryback DG, Robert SA. Gender differences in health-related quality-of-life are partly explained by sociodemographic and socioeconomic variation between adult men and women in the US: evidence from four US nationally representative data sets. Qual Life Res. 2010; 19(8): 1115–1124.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
28. Dondo TB, Munyombwe T, Hall M, et al. Sex differences in health-related quality of life trajectories following myocardial infarction: national longitudinal cohort study. BMJ Open. 2022; 12:e062508.
crossref pmid pmc
29. Chang HC, Liang J, Hsu HC, Lin SK, Chang TH, Liu SH. Regular exercise and the trajectory of health-related quality of life among Taiwanese adults: a cohort study analysis 2006-2014. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(1): 1352.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
30. Hajian-Tilaki K, Heidari B, Hajian-Tilaki A. Are gender differences in health-related quality of life attributable to sociodemographic characteristics and chronic disease conditions in elderly people? Int J Prev Med. 2017; 8:95.
crossref pmid pmc
31. Cho KS. Current status of non-communicable diseases in the Republic of Korea. Public Health Wkly Rep. 2021; 14:166–177.

32. Van Wilder L, Devleesschauwer B, Clays E, et al. The impact of multimorbidity patterns on health-related quality of life in the general population: results of the Belgian Health Interview Survey. Qual Life Res. 2022; 31(2): 551–565.
crossref pmid pdf
33. Gabriella RK, Martin EPS. There’s a mental health crisis at work because life is changing too fast. TIME. 2023. https://time.com/6249306/work-mental-health-crisis-life-changes.

34. Scarabottolo CC, Tebar WR, Gobbo LA, et al. Analysis of different domains of physical activity with health-related quality of life in adults: 2-year cohort. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022; 20(1): 71.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
35. Heo M, Jang YM. Analysis of influencing factors of health-related quality of life among Korean adults in their 20s using the HINT-8 index—using the primary data of the 8th Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Crisisonomy. 2023; 19(8): 137–149.

36. Park I, Kim Y. The effect of exercise knowledge and health risk perception on physical activity in college students. Korean J Sport. 2019; 17(2): 163–77.

37. Larsson H, Edberg AK, Bolmsjö I, Rämgård M. Contrasts in older persons’ experiences and significant others’ perceptions of existential loneliness. Nurs Ethics. 2019; 26(6): 1623–1637.
crossref pmid pdf
38. Raymond F, Sharon P. Companies that promote a culture of health, safety, and wellbeing outperform in the marketplace. J Occup Environ Med. 2021; 63(6): 456–461.
crossref pmid
TOOLS
Share :
Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+ Line it
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •    
  • 1,180 View
  • 31 Download
Related articles in AJK


ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
ARTICLE CATEGORY

Browse all articles >

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Editorial Office
The Office of 10th Gangnam Sangga, 303, Hyoryong-ro, Seochogu, Seoul, Korea (06643)
Tel: +82-10-4044-3814    E-mail: ajk.editor@gmail.com                

Copyright © 2025 by The Asian Society of Kinesiology and the Korean Academy of Kinesiology.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next