ArticleBMC public health2026
The causal relationship between family economic, cultural, and social capital and child health in urban and rural China.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study investigates the causal impact of family capital on the health of children and adolescents in China, focusing on the urban-rural divide. Despite research on factors like family income and parent-child relationships, causal relationships and urban-rural disparity remain underexplored.
methodsThe study incorporates factors like “family tradition” and “intergenerational care,” using longitudinal data from the China Family Panel Studies (2010–2020). Fixed effects models, lagged regression, and instrumental variable techniques explore family capital’s impact on self-rated health, depression, and frequency of being sick.
resultsFamily social capital complements family economic capital and family cultural capital. Compared to urban children, family economic capital more significantly improves rural children’s self-rated health (β = 0.048, p < 0.001) and reduces depression (β=-0.059, p < 0.001). Family cultural capital helps reduce the frequency of being sick for rural (β=-0.013, p < 0.05) but not urban children. Family social capital helps reduce depression in urban (β=-0.056, p < 0.001) but not rural children. Network social interactions, interactions with relatives and friends, and intergenerational caregiving within family social capital demonstrate positive and healthy effects under “optimal” conditions.
conclusionsFamily capital significantly influences child health, with notable differences between urban and rural areas. Health interventions should account for these differences to optimize outcomes for children in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.