MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406110391 · doi:10.69980/redvet.v25i1.1555

Physical Activity and Cognition in Relation to Nomophobia Among Young Adults: A Correlation Study

2024· article· en· W4406110391 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Electronica de Veterinaria · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrelationPsychologyCognitionRelation (database)Developmental psychologyPsychiatryMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Long-term use of smartphones has been linked to a number of negative health effects, such as an increased risk of musculoskeletal pain, anxiety, depression, and poor sleep, as well as fatigue and obesity or overweight. The link between physical activity and cognition in regard to nomophobia in young adults is the main focus of these health concerns. Nomophobia also creates anxiety that interferes with day-to-day functioning. Study design: A Correlation Study Aim & Objective: To find out the relationship of nomophobia with physical activity and cognition among young adults using Nomophobia questionnaire (NMP-Q), Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA) and International physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ). Participants: In this study total 85 participants were included in the study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The participants included are young adults between the age group of 18-30 years and who are smartphone users. As per the exclusion criteria individual who have orthopedic limitation, cognitive impairment and neurological condition were excluded. Method: Participants were assessed for Nomophobia, Cognition and Level of physical activity using Nomophobia questionnaire (NMP-Q), Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA) and International physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ). Result: The descriptive statistics for nomophobia questionnaire (NMP-Q), Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA) and international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) are presented, For the NMP-Q dataset, the mean value is 74.96, with a standard error of 1.48, a standard deviation of 13.67, and a sample variance of 186.82. In MOCA the mean was 28.12, with a very small standard error of 0.12, a standard deviation of 1.08, and a sample variance of 1.18. The IPAQ dataset shows a mean of 1491.95, a standard error of 164.43, a high standard deviation of 1516.00, and a very large sample variance of 2298245.09. The correlations between Nomophobia questionnaire and Montreal cognitive assessment, we observe a Pearson correlation of -0.064, indicating a very weak negative linear relationship. The associated Sig. (2-tailed) value is 0.561, which is not statistically significant. The number of participants (N) for this pair is 85. For the correlation between Nomophobia Questionnaire and International Physical Activity questionnaire, the Pearson correlation is 0.024, signifying a very weak positive linear relationship. The Sig. (2tailed) value is 0.828, also indicating a lack of statistical significance. There are 85 participants for this pair as well. Conclusion: In conclusion, the correlation analysis of the variables Nomophobia Questionnaire, Montreal cognitive Assessment and International Physical Activity Questionnaire reveals predominantly weak and non-significant relationships between most pairs of variables, with Pearson correlation coefficients close to zero and p values well above the typical threshold for significance. Specifically, the correlations between NMP-Q and MOCA, NMP-Q and IPAQ were all found to be weak and not statistically significant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Electronica de Veterinaria→Same topicImpact of Technology on Adolescents→French-language works237,207→