The association between road safety and nomophobia
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable* | OR [95%CI] | p-value | OR [95%CI] | p-value |
| Moderate nomophobia | 1.29[0.96-1.75] | 0.9 | 1.59[0.44-5.74] | 0.1 |
| Severe nomophobia | 4.62[3.35-6.38] | 0.01 | 4.54[3.28-6.29] | 0.001 |
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable* | OR [95%CI] | OR [95%CI] | ||
| Moderate nomophobia | 1.29[0.96-1.75] | 0.9 | 1.59[0.44-5.74] | 0.1 |
| Severe nomophobia | 4.62[3.35-6.38] | 0.01 | 4.54[3.28-6.29] | 0.001 |
Note(s): Logistic regression analysis. The dependent variable in model 1 and model 2 was road safety measured by an indicator variable of the presence of a traffic contravention history in the past four weeks. The independent variable was nomophobia status (against the reference of no nomophobia). Model 1 was crude, and Model 2 adjusted for age, sex, ad marital status. **Significant at p < 0.05. *Ref = mild nomophobia
Source(s): Table by authors
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.