Nomophobia is Associated with Insomnia but Not with Age, Sex, BMI, or Mobile Phone Screen Size in Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: NOMOPHOBIA (NO MObile PHone PhoBIA) or problematic smartphone use is a psychological disorder in which people are afraid of being cut off from their mobile phones. Currently, there has been no direct assessment of mobile phone screen size in the home setting and its effect on nomophobia and related symptoms, such as insomnia. Thus, we investigated the association between nomophobia, insomnia, and mobile phone screen size in a young adult population in Bahrain. Patients and Methods: Using a descriptive, cross-sectional design, we surveyed participants aged 18 to 35 between August and September 2020 using an online questionnaire. Participants completed demographic questions and questions about personal mobile phones, the Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q), and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). The mobile phone screen size was determined using an open-source online database. Crude and adjusted regression analyses were fitted to examine the associations between the study variables. Results: A total of 549 individuals, 54% females, were included in the final analyses. One hundred and fourteen participants (21%) had severe nomophobia, and 81 (14%) had clinical insomnia. A strong positive pair-wise linear association was observed between NMP-Q and ISI β 0.15, P = 0.001. Age, sex, BMI, and mobile phone screen size showed no association with the NMP-Q. Conclusion: Nomophobia is very prevalent in young adult men and women, and it is closely associated with insomnia, regardless of mobile phone screen size, suggesting that mobile phone screen size should not be used as a proxy for hazardous usage. Keywords: blue light, insomnia, ISI, no mobile phone phobia, problematic smartphone use, sleep problems
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".