Table 3.
Univariate logistic regression analysis of associations of sociodemographic variables with smartphone addiction, N = 440.
| Non-Smartphone Addicted |
Smartphone Addicted | OR | 95% CI | p | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | (%) | n | (%) | Lower | Upper | |||
| Gender | ||||||||
| Male | 74 | (43.5) | 160 | (59.3) | 1.88 | 1.28 | 2.78 | 0.001 |
| Female | 96 | (56.5) | 110 | (40.7) | Ref. | |||
| Age | ||||||||
| ≤25 | 92 | (54.1) | 184 | (68.1) | 2.88 | 1.50 | 5.53 | 0.001 |
| 26–30 | 52 | (30.6) | 68 | (25.2) | 1.88 | 0.93 | 3.80 | 0.075 |
| ≥31 | 26 | (15.3) | 18 | (6.7) | Ref. | |||
| Occupation status | ||||||||
| Employed | 60 | (35.3) | 67 | (24.8) | Ref. | |||
| Unemployed | 20 | (11.8) | 46 | (17.0) | 2.06 | 1.09 | 3.84 | 0.025 |
| Students | 90 | (52.9) | 157 | (58.1) | 1.56 | 1.01 | 2.41 | 0.044 |
| Family monthly income | ||||||||
| <5000 TK | 14 | (8.2) | 25 | (9.3) | Ref. | |||
| 5000–<10,000 TK | 21 | (12.4) | 35 | (13.0) | 0.93 | 0.39 | 2.18 | 0.873 |
| 10,000–<20,000 TK | 39 | (22.9) | 70 | (25.9) | 1.00 | 0.46 | 2.15 | 0.990 |
| ≥20,000 TK | 96 | (56.5) | 140 | (51.9) | 0.81 | 0.40 | 1.65 | 0.573 |
| Marital status | ||||||||
| Single | 120 | (70.6) | 210 | (77.8) | Ref. | |||
| Married | 48 | (28.2) | 51 | (20.4) | 0.65 | 0.41 | 1.02 | 0.064 |
| Divorced/Widowed/Others | 2 | (1.2) | 5 | (1.9) | 1.42 | 0.27 | 7.47 | 0.673 |
| Family size | ||||||||
| Small (≤4) | 90 | (52.9) | 114 | (42.2) | Ref. | |||
| Average (5–7) | 75 | (44.1) | 131 | (48.5) | 1.37 | 0.92 | 2.04 | 0.112 |
| Large (≥8) | 5 | (2.9) | 25 | (9.3) | 1.42 | 1.45 | 10.72 | 0.007 |
| Education level | ||||||||
| Primary or secondary | 19 | (11.2) | 28 | (10.4) | Ref. | |||
| College or university qualification | 151 | (88.8) | 242 | (89.6) | 1.08 | 0.58 | 2.01 | 0.790 |
OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval, A p-Value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.