Table 4 Binary logistic regression of smartphone addiction among participants by gender and residence [OR (95% CI)].

From: Latent profile analysis of five childhood maltreatment subtypes and its associations with smartphone addiction among Chinese adolescents

Variables

Total

Gender

Residence

Boys

Girls

Urban

Rural

Childhood maltreatment

Ā Profile 1

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā Profile 2

2.191 (1.988–2.415)***

2.157 (1.859–2.504)***

2.208 (1.940–2.513)***

2.294 (2.007–2.623)***

2.078 (1.803–2.396)***

Ā Profile 3

1.783 (1.530–2.078)***

1.746 (1.438–2.120)***

1.844 (1.438–2.364)***

1.701 (1.343–2.156)***

1.835 (1.500-2.245)***

Ā Profile 4

1.902 (1.316–2.748)**

1.910 (1.257–2.902)**

1.881 (0.867–4.078)

1.521 (0.874–2.647)

2.286 (1.382–3.782)**

Screen duration

Ā Less than 30

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā 30–60

1.297 (1.191–1.411)***

1.214 (1.070–1.378)**

1.360 (1.214–1.525)***

1.413 (1.251–1.596)***

1.220 (1.082–1.375)**

Ā 61–120

1.999 (1.829–2.185)***

1.764 (1.549–2.010)***

2.215 (1.961–2.503)***

2.294 (2.019–2.606)***

1.771 (1.559–2.011)***

Ā More than 120

3.801 (3.467–4.166)***

3.366 (2.956–3.832)***

4.244 (3.722–4.839)***

4.190 (3.657–4.801)***

3.563 (3.141–4.042)***

Physical activity duration

Ā Less than 30

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā 30–60

0.680 (0.634–0.729)***

0.735 (0.664–0.814)***

0.635 (0.577-0.700)***

0.621 (0.564–0.684)***

0.746 (0.674–0.824)***

Ā More than 60

0.625 (0.569–0.686)***

0.637 (0.566–0.718)***

0.647 (0.552–0.757)***

0.563 (0.496–0.640)***

0.696 (0.605-0.800)***

Age

1.094 (1.054–1.135)***

1.105 (1.049–1.164)***

1.085 (1.030–1.143)**

1.081 (1.028–1.136)**

1.112 (1.053–1.175)***

High school type

Ā Junior

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā Senior

1.361 (1.210–1.531)***

1.326 (1.122–1.568)**

1.400 (1.185–1.654)***

1.342 (1.143–1.577)***

1.327 (1.114–1.581)**

Family construction

Ā Two biological parents

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā Single biological parent

1.104 (1.006–1.212)*

1.157 (1.012–1.322)*

1.062 (0.932–1.209)

1.128 (0.987–1.289)

1.083 (0.951–1.234)

Ā Others

1.153 (1.026–1.296)*

1.160 (0.984–1.369)

1.148 (0.972–1.354)

1.211 (1.014–1.446)*

1.113 (0.953–1.299)

Father’s education

Ā Primary school or less

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā Junior high school

0.868 (0.778–0.969)*

0.753 (0.643–0.881)***

0.993 (0.851–1.159)

0.902 (0.754–1.079)

0.853 (0.742–0.982)*

Ā Senior high school

0.914 (0.809–1.032)

0.857 (0.719–1.020)

0.972 (0.820–1.153)

0.936 (0.774–1.130)

0.915 (0.777–1.077)

Ā College or more

0.952 (0.827–1.095)

0.901 (0.738-1.100)

1.003 (0.823–1.221)

1.058 (0.861-1.300)

0.827 (0.676–1.012)

Mother’s education

Ā Primary school or less

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

1.000

Ā Junior high school

1.023 (0.934–1.121)

1.029 (0.904–1.171)

1.023 (0.899–1.164)

1.001 (0.868–1.155)

1.044 (0.927–1.175)

Ā Senior high school

1.143 (1.026–1.274)*

1.074 (0.921–1.253)

1.212 (1.040–1.412)*

1.130 (0.964–1.325)

1.147 (0.987–1.334)

Ā College or more

1.048 (0.919–1.196)

0.922 (0.764–1.113)

1.175 (0.975–1.416)

0.986 (0.820–1.185)

1.151 (0.944–1.403)

Gender

Ā Boys

1.000

NA

NA

1.000

1.000

Ā Girls

1.175 (1.102–1.253)***

NA

NA

1.169 (1.069–1.278)**

1.178 (1.073–1.293)**

Residence

Ā Urban

1.000

1.000

1.000

NA

NA

Ā Rural

1.202 (1.125–1.284)***

1.198 (1.089–1.317)***

1.212 (1.105–1.329)***

NA

NA

  1. Profile 1: Low Maltreatment, Profile 2: High Emotional Maltreatment and Low Sexual Abuse, Profile 3: Moderate Multiple Maltreatment, Profile 4: High Sexual Abuse with Multiple Maltreatment.
  2. Family income was not significant in all models (p > .05)..
  3. ***p < .001, **p < .01, * p < .05..