Prevalence of Nomophobia in University Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.3 Q3 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Healthcare Informatics Research Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.4258/hir.2023.29.1.40
Kimberly G Tuco, Sharong D Castro-Diaz, David R Soriano-Moreno, Vicente A Benites-Zapata
{"title":"Prevalence of Nomophobia in University Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Kimberly G Tuco,&nbsp;Sharong D Castro-Diaz,&nbsp;David R Soriano-Moreno,&nbsp;Vicente A Benites-Zapata","doi":"10.4258/hir.2023.29.1.40","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of nomophobia in university students.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted of the following databases: Web of Science/ Core Collection, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Ovid/ MEDLINE until March 2021. Cross-sectional studies reporting the prevalence of nomophobia in undergraduate or postgraduate university students that assessed nomophobia with the 20-item Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q) tool were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using sensitivity analysis according to the risk of bias, and subgrouping by country, sex, and major.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 28 cross-sectional studies with a total of 11,300 participants from eight countries, of which 23 were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of mild nomophobia was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-28%; I2 = 95.3%), that of moderate nomophobia was 56% (95% CI, 53%-60%; I2 = 91.2%), and that of severe nomophobia was 17% (95% CI, 15%-20%; I2 = 91.7%). Regarding countries, Indonesia had the highest prevalence of severe nomophobia (71%) and Germany had the lowest (3%). The prevalence was similar according to sex and major.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found a high prevalence of moderate and severe nomophobia in university students. Interventions are needed to prevent and treat this problem in educational institutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12947,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":"29 1","pages":"40-53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/70/16/hir-2023-29-1-40.PMC9932304.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2023.29.1.40","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of nomophobia in university students.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted of the following databases: Web of Science/ Core Collection, Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Ovid/ MEDLINE until March 2021. Cross-sectional studies reporting the prevalence of nomophobia in undergraduate or postgraduate university students that assessed nomophobia with the 20-item Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q) tool were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using sensitivity analysis according to the risk of bias, and subgrouping by country, sex, and major.

Results: We included 28 cross-sectional studies with a total of 11,300 participants from eight countries, of which 23 were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of mild nomophobia was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-28%; I2 = 95.3%), that of moderate nomophobia was 56% (95% CI, 53%-60%; I2 = 91.2%), and that of severe nomophobia was 17% (95% CI, 15%-20%; I2 = 91.7%). Regarding countries, Indonesia had the highest prevalence of severe nomophobia (71%) and Germany had the lowest (3%). The prevalence was similar according to sex and major.

Conclusions: We found a high prevalence of moderate and severe nomophobia in university students. Interventions are needed to prevent and treat this problem in educational institutions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大学生无手机恐惧症的流行:系统回顾与元分析。
目的:本研究的目的是评估大学生无手机恐惧症的患病率。方法:系统检索以下数据库:Web of Science/ Core Collection、Scopus、PubMed、Embase和Ovid/ MEDLINE,检索截止日期为2021年3月。横断面研究报告了大学生或研究生中无恐惧症的患病率,这些研究使用20项无恐惧症问卷(NMP-Q)工具评估了无恐惧症。研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估一式两份。采用随机效应模型对比例进行meta分析。根据偏倚风险,并按国家、性别和专业进行亚分组,采用敏感性分析评估异质性。结果:我们纳入了28项横断面研究,共有来自8个国家的11,300名参与者,其中23项纳入了meta分析。轻度无手机恐惧症的患病率为24%(95%可信区间[CI], 20%-28%;I2 = 95.3%),中度无恐惧症为56% (95% CI, 53%-60%;I2 = 91.2%),重度无手机恐惧症为17% (95% CI, 15%-20%;I2 = 91.7%)。就国家而言,印度尼西亚的严重无恐惧症患病率最高(71%),德国最低(3%)。不同性别和专业的患病率相似。结论:我们发现大学生中中度和重度无手机恐惧症的患病率很高。需要采取干预措施来预防和治疗教育机构中的这一问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare Informatics Research
Healthcare Informatics Research MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
44
期刊最新文献
Implementation of the Digital Health Approach to Support Learning for Health Students Based on Bloom's Taxonomy: A Systematic Review. Mapping Drug Terms via Integration of a Retrieval-Augmented Generation Algorithm with a Large Language Model. Milestones and Growth: The 30-Year Journey of Healthcare Informatics Research. Mobile Application for Digital Health Coaching in the Self-Management of Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Development and Usability Study. Nursing Records Regarding Decision-Making in Cancer Supportive Care: A Retrospective Study in Japan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1