ArticleBMC public health2026
Smartphone addiction, nomophobia, and neck-related functional disability among undergraduate students in a Nigerian University: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid increase in smartphone use among university students has raised concerns regarding digital dependence and associated musculoskeletal problems, particularly neck-related functional disability (NFD). However, the relative contributions of behavioural dependence (smartphone addiction and nomophobia) and ergonomic factors (posture and usage patterns) to neck disability remain insufficiently understood in low- and middle-income settings.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 399 undergraduate students at the University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and validated instruments: the Smartphone Addiction Scale-Short Version (SAS-SV), Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q), and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Descriptive statistics were computed for all variables. NDI scores were categorised to estimate prevalence of NFD. Pearson correlations were used to assess associations, with Spearman correlation conducted as a sensitivity analysis. Multiple linear regression models were fitted using log-transformed NDI (log NDI) as the outcome. Binary logistic regression was additionally performed to identify factors associated with moderate-to-severe disability (NDI ≥ 15). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsParticipants reported high smartphone use (6.18 ± 2.39 h/day). The mean smartpone addiction score was 35.60 ± 9.99, and the mean nomopobia score was 95.58 ± 31.57, indicating moderate-to-high digital dependence. The mean NFD score was 8.76 ± 6.38, with 82.7% of participants classified as having no or mild disability and 17.3% exhibiting moderate-to-severe disability. Smartphone addiction was significantly associated with NFD (r = 0.249, p < 0.001) and remained the strongest independent correlate in both linear (b = 0.0220, p < 0.001) and logistic regression models (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.07). Neck flexion angle was also significantly associated with NFD. Nomophobia was correlated with smartphone addiction but was not an independent predictor of NFD.
conclusionsSmartphone addiction and forward-flexed neck posture were significantly associated with neck-related functional disability among university students. Nomophobia appears to reflect psychological dependence without direct physical impact. These findings highlight the need for integrated behavioural and ergonomic interventions to reduce digital-health risks in university settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.