The association between anxiety, activity performance and nomophobia in students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the association of nomophobia on activity participation and anxiety. This cross-sectional and descriptive study was conducted between March and June of 2024 with a sample of students studying at the Faculty of Health Sciences of the University. The Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) were utilized for data collection. Of the 382 students who participated in the study, 93.2% were female. Female students demonstrated a mean score of 67.21 ± 16.93(min-max:20–100) on the NMP-Q scale, with a range from 20 to 100; a mean score of 6.65 ± 2.2424 (min-max:0.00–10.00) on the COPM, with a range from 0.00 to 10.00; and a mean score of 41.0 ± 10.67(min-max:20–68) on the STAI, with a range from 20 to 68. The findings of the correlation analysis revealed a significant, negative relationship between the level of activity performance among students and their levels of anxiety (rpb=-0.127, p < 0.005) and nomophobia (rpb=-0.147, p < 0.001). As the levels of nomophobia among students increased, there was a 19.7% decrease in performance levels (ß=-0.197; R 2 = 0.290), a 7.9% decrease in activity satisfaction levels (ß=-0.079; R 2 = 0.290), and a 6.9% increase in anxiety levels (ß=0.069; R 2 = 0.290). The findings of the study indicate that nomophobia in students negatively affects activity participation and leads to elevated anxiety levels. Given the high rate of mobile device use in the young population, it can be posited that a new public health concern is emerging. Occupational therapists can design activity programs that can enhance activity performance and reduce anxiety. They can also encourage students to participate in sports or artistic activities to improve peer interactions.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".