大学生手机成瘾干预方法有效性的meta分析  

A meta-analysis on effectiveness of intervention of mobile phone addiction in college students

作　　者：潘桦 张萌[2] 黄建榕[2] PAN Hua;ZHANG Meng;HUANG Jian-rong(Application Promotion Department,Educational Technology Center of Guangdong Province,Guangzhou Guangdong,510250,China;Social Work Research Centre,South China University of Technology,GuangzhouGuangdong,510640,China)

机构地区：[1]广东省电化教育馆应用推广部,广东广州510250 [2]华南理工大学社会工作研究中心,广东广州510640

出　　处：《职业与健康》2023年第2期260-269,共10页Occupation and Health

摘　　要：目的 了解不同干预方法改善大学生手机成瘾的有效性。方法 对中国知网、万方、维普等中文数据库、Web of science、PubMed、EBSCO等外文数据库以及Cochrane library在线研究平台进行文献检索,2位评价者根据纳入与排除标准独立筛选文献、提取资料和质量评价,采用Review Manager 5.2软件进行meta分析,计算总体效应值(d值)及其95%可信区间。结果 共纳入33项原始研究,含40个独立样本,运动和心理干预的独立样本分别为10个和30个,样本总量为1 934人。Meta分析结果显示,(1)运动干预的合并效应量为-3.214,亚组分析显示,运动干预分类和测量工具的组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),干预周期的组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(2)心理干预的合并效应量为-1.736,亚组分析显示,心理干预分类的组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),测量工具、干预周期、样本来源、出版类型的组间比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);固定分组为学位论文时,心理辅导与心理训练干预的组间比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),固定分组为熊婕编制的大学生手机成瘾倾向量表、8周、东部地区时,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。(3)综合运动干预和心理干预的数据,干预的合并效应量为-2.132;亚组分析显示,不同干预方法、测量工具的组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),干预周期的组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);固定分组为期刊论文时,运动干预与心理干预的组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),固定分组为中部地区时,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 运动干预能显著改善大学生的手机成瘾,且混合式运动干预效果优于开放式运动干预,开放式运动干预效果优于闭锁式运动干预;心理干预能显著改善大学生的手机成瘾,且心理辅导的干预效果显著优于心理训练;运动干预的效果显著优于心理干预。Objective To explore the effectiveness of different intervention methods to reduce the mobile phone addiction of college students.Methods The Chinese databases such as CNKI,Wanfang and CQVIP,as well as foreign databases such as Web of Science,PubMed and EBSCO,and Cochrane library online research platform were searched to collect relevant studies.Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies.Meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.2,and the total effect value(d) and its 95%confidence interval were calculated.Results A total of 33 articles(including 40 independent studies) were included in the study,combining with 10 exercise intervention studies and 30 psychological intervention studies,and the total number of samples was1 934.The results of meta-analysis were as follows:(1)The combinedeffect size of exercise intervention was-3.214.And the results of sub-group analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences among the groups of exercise type and measurement tool(P<0.05),while no statistically significant difference among intervention cycle(P>0.05).(2) The combined effect size of psychological intervention was-1.736.And the results of sub-group analysis showed thatthere was statistically significant difference among different groups in classification of psychological intervention(P<0.05),while no statistically significant differences among the groups of measurement tool,intervention cycle,geographical distribution and publication type(P>0.05).When the fixed grouping wasthe dissertation,there was statistically significant differencebetween the groups of psychological counseling and psychological training(P<0.05).When the fixed grouping was mobile phone addiction tendency scale for college student developed by XIONG Jie,in eight week intervention and from central region,the differenceswere notstatisticallysignificantbetween them( P > 0.05).(3)The effect size of the combination o

关 键 词：手机成瘾 运动干预 心理干预 META分析 

分 类 号：R181.3[医药卫生—流行病学]