Promoting healthy digital device usage: recommendations for youth and parents
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Young people's usage of digital devices is currently a central topic of interest for researchers, clinicians and the general public, particularly with regards to the impact of social media on adolescents’ mental health. Notably, the duration of screen time is not the primary determinant of mental health outcomes1, 2. Rather, the “quality” of an individual's device usage patterns, experiences and interactions online, and how they correlate with other lifestyle variables (e.g., sedentary time and sleep) appear to matter most1, 3, 4. Other than avoiding the more clear-cut “online harms” (e.g., addictive behaviors, cyberbullying, and online blackmail or exploitation), there is a lack of consensus on how youth can improve the “quality” of their online time. This is in part because the details of what constitutes “healthy” device usage are unclear, and likely differ with regards to sociodemographic factors1. Here we sought to produce a simplified set of recommended actions to promote adolescents’ healthy digital device usage. We assembled a multidisciplinary team of individuals with expertise across child and adolescent mental health, social media research, behavior change interventions, and public health. We then identified and reviewed recently published guideline/recommendation articles, online resources and reports from independent think tanks – particularly those that included feedback from young people themselves. We checked these resources for directly actionable advice, rather than general principles on healthy usage patterns. We then considered the recommended actions from such documents alongside the underlying scientific evidence and the team's experience, in order to put forward the top three tips for healthy device usage in adolescents. We also produced a further set of recommendations for parents who wish to implement such changes in their family units. As digital device usage has been increasing worldwide, the impact on youth mental health has emerged as a central concern. We sought to produce a set of best-practice approaches, on the basis of available evidence and guidelines, for adolescents and their parents looking to improve their device usage patterns. Ultimately, however, managing this issue at a societal level will require a whole system approach, involving partnerships between governments, social media companies, and health care organizations. To propel this, more high-quality research is urgently needed to determine what actions policy makers, clinicians and the public can take, including the perspectives of young people themselves.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».