Comparison of mobile phone usage and physical activity on glycemic status, body composition & lifestyle in male Saudi mobile phone users

2022 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 670

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2022

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Comparison of mobile phone usage and physical activity on glycemic status, body composition & lifestyle in male Saudi mobile phone users Al-Khlaiwi T, Habib SS, Alshalan M, Al-Qhatani M, Alsowiegh S, Queid S, Alyabis O, Al-Khliwi H. Comparison of mobile phone usage and physical activity on glycemic status, body composition & lifestyle in male Saudi mobile phone users. Heliyon. 2022 Sep 15;8(9):e10646. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10646. Abstract Background & Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effects of mobile phone usage and physical activity on HbA1c, body composition, and lifestyle among male Saudi Arabian mobile phone users. Methods: The study was conducted in the Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from July 2020 to July 2021. The study sample consisted of 203 non-smoker male Saudi participants aged from 20 to 60 years who used mobile phones. Personal information was obtained through interviews using a proforma. The participants were divided into three groups according to their daily mobile phone usage: Group (1): less than 2 h, Group (2): 2-3 h, and Group (3): more than 3 h, and according to their physical activities: Group (1): sedentary, Group (2): average, and Group (3): athletes. Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c), Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA), and (SF) 36- items survey was performed. Results: The mean age of 203 Saudi male adult participants was 28.0 ± 10.4 years. Mobile phone usage in the less than 2 h group was (33.5%), between 2-3 h (22.7%), and more than 3 h (43.8%) respectively. The mean age of Group (3), who used mobile phones for more than 3 h, was the lowest (23.9 ± 5.7). The results showed that HbA1C levels were almost equal in all three groups (5.8 ± 0.4, 5.7 ± 0.4, and 5.7 ± 0.3 respectively). In addition, emotional well-being and social functioning showed insignificant decreases in the more than 3 h group compared to other groups of mobile phone usage (69.3 ± 15.7, 70.9 ± 15.5, 65.2 ± 16.0, p = .091 and 82.9 ± 201, 81.2 ± 18.7, 77.6 ± 21.6, p = .267) respectively. No effect was detected between groups regarding various body compositions. Regarding physical activity classifications: the sedentary group constituted (36%) of the sample, whereas the average and athlete groups represented (53.7%) and (10.3%) of the total sample respectively. There was a significant decrease in BMI (29.6 ± 7.8, 25.3 ± 5.1,24.7 ± 5.6, p = .000), fat mass (24.7 ± 15.0, 17.1 ± 9.1, 15.3 ± 10.6, p = .000), and free fat mass (64.0 ± 10.2, 56.8 ± 8.7, 57.5 ± 8.0, p = .000) in the average and the athletic groups compared to the sedentary group. No significant difference was found in HbA1c between physical activity groups (5.8 ± 0.4, 5.7 ± 0.4, 5.7 ± 0.4, p = .218). Conclusions: Mobile phone usage does not affect HbA1c and body composition parameters. Furthermore, we found the youngers used mobile phones longer than others. Insignificant decrease in emotional well-being and social functioning parameters of the style of life due to long mobile phone usage which needs more attention. Conclusions and recommendations We concluded that mobile phone usage does not affect HbA1c and body composition parameters. Also, youngers were found to use mobile phones more than others. This should increase public awareness about the long usage of mobile phones among society members. More attention should be directed toward teenagers to eliminate the effects of mobile phones on emotions and social functioning. Further study on a large sample size including different age groups, long mobile phone usage, and female gender is highly recommended. The effect of mobile phone usage on visceral fat is of great value to be studied. A well-controlled study that compares differences in the frequency of radiation, exposure time, distance from the source of the radiation, and its effects on age should be carried out, supported, and funded to evaluate the exact effect of Electromagnetic Field Radiation. Open access paper: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typecross_sectional

Effect directionno_effect

PopulationNon-smoker male Saudi mobile phone users aged 20–60 years (Saudi Arabia)

Sample size203

ExposureDaily mobile phone usage grouped as <2 h, 2–3 h, >3 h

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

HbA1c levels were reported as almost equal across mobile phone usage groups, and no effect was detected between mobile phone usage groups regarding body composition. Emotional well-being and social functioning showed non-significant decreases in the >3 h/day mobile phone usage group compared with lower-use groups. Physical activity (average/athlete vs sedentary) was associated with significantly lower BMI, fat mass, and free fat mass, while HbA1c did not differ significantly by physical activity group.

Outcomes measured

HbA1c
Body composition (BIA; including BMI, fat mass, free fat mass)
Lifestyle/quality of life (SF-36; emotional well-being, social functioning)
Physical activity classification (sedentary/average/athletes)

Limitations

Exposure characterized only by self-reported daily mobile phone usage time; no radiation frequency, distance, or other exposure metrics reported
Cross-sectional grouping/comparison design limits causal inference
Study restricted to non-smoker males; authors recommend inclusion of females and broader age groups in future work

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "Daily mobile phone usage grouped as <2 h, 2–3 h, >3 h"
  },
  "population": "Non-smoker male Saudi mobile phone users aged 20–60 years (Saudi Arabia)",
  "sample_size": 203,
  "outcomes": [
    "HbA1c",
    "Body composition (BIA; including BMI, fat mass, free fat mass)",
    "Lifestyle/quality of life (SF-36; emotional well-being, social functioning)",
    "Physical activity classification (sedentary/average/athletes)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "HbA1c levels were reported as almost equal across mobile phone usage groups, and no effect was detected between mobile phone usage groups regarding body composition. Emotional well-being and social functioning showed non-significant decreases in the >3 h/day mobile phone usage group compared with lower-use groups. Physical activity (average/athlete vs sedentary) was associated with significantly lower BMI, fat mass, and free fat mass, while HbA1c did not differ significantly by physical activity group.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Exposure characterized only by self-reported daily mobile phone usage time; no radiation frequency, distance, or other exposure metrics reported",
    "Cross-sectional grouping/comparison design limits causal inference",
    "Study restricted to non-smoker males; authors recommend inclusion of females and broader age groups in future work"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "mobile phone usage",
    "HbA1c",
    "glycemic status",
    "body composition",
    "bioelectrical impedance analysis",
    "SF-36",
    "emotional well-being",
    "social functioning",
    "physical activity",
    "Saudi Arabia"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "mobile-phones",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study compares outcomes across groups defined by daily mobile phone usage duration."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10646
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library