Table 5

Interaction between computer exposure variables and mobile phone use at baseline, and sleep disturbances (new cases) at 1-year follow-up
MEN WOMEN
Mobile phone use Mobile phone use
Low Medium High Low Medium High
Computer exposure Cases (%) PR (95% CI) Cases (%) PR (95% CI) Cases (%) PR (95% CI) Cases (%) PR (95% CI) Cases (%) PR (95% CI) Cases (%) PR (95% CI)
Computer use
High 38 (16) 2.2 (1.03–4.55) 17 (19) 2.9 (1.32–6.34) 14 (22) 3.4 (1.55–7.63) 47 (21) 1.2 (0.84–1.66) 18 (19) 1.1 (0.69–1.76) 36 (34) 1.8 (1.28–2.51)
Medium 32 (14) 2.1 (1.00–4.32) 16 (21) 3.2 (1.47–7.16) 17 (24) 3.9 (1.81–8.44) 57 (17) 1.0 (0.70–1.34) 19 (15) 0.8 (0.52–1.33) 17 (15) 0.8 (0.50–1.29)
Low 8 (6) 1.0 (ref) 8 (10) 1.7 (0.69–4.38) 9 (15) 2.4 (1.00–5.90) 68 (19) 1.0 (ref) 36 (25) 1.3 (0.94–1.92) 24 (23) 1.1 (0.75–1.72)
Email/chat use
High 11 (23) 1.8 (0.96–3.31) 9 (32) 2.9 (1.66–5.24) 7 (32) 2.9 (1.47–5.59) 14 (29) 1.7 (1.06–2.68) 7 (28) 1.7 (0.88–3.08) 31 (31) 1.7 (1.08–2.68)
Medium 18 (16) 1.4 (0.82–2.25) 9 (20) 1.8 (0.96–3.46) 4 (10) 30 (19) 1.1 (0.78–1.61) 19 (24) 1.4 (0.92–2.12) 23 (26) 1.5 (0.99–2.13)
Low 49 (11) 1.0 (ref) 23 (14) 1.3 (0.82–2.08) 29 (22) 2.2 (1.41–3.34) 126 (18) 1.0 (ref) 47 (18) 1.0 (0.75–1.37) 39 (21) 1.1 (0.78–1.47)

Participants who reported symptoms at baseline were excluded from analysis of the mental health outcome concerned. Prevalence of mental health symptoms (cases and %) at 1-year follow-up in each exposure category is shown. The prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were adjusted for relationship status, educational level, and occupation. PRs with a CI not including 1.00 (before rounding) are given in bold. Results of analyses with fewer than five cases are not presented, indicated as “…”.

Thomée et al.

Thomée et al. BMC Psychiatry 2012 12:176   doi:10.1186/1471-244X-12-176

Open Data