Impacts of Parental Technoference on Parent-Child Relationships and Child Health and Developmental Outcomes: A Scoping Review
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: With increases in the ubiquity of cellphones, parental technoference poses a relevant concern for parent-child relationships (i.e., parent-child interactions, attachment and bonding), children's development (i.e., gross and fine motor, language, social, cognitive) and children’s health (i.e., psychological, biological). Parental technoference refers to disrupted interactions between a parent and their child due to a parent’s use of a technological device. Researchers have started to report associations between parental technoference and parent-child relationships (e.g., reduced parental responsiveness toward their child) and children’s health outcomes (e.g., increased risk for behavioral concerns). Although previous reviews have been conducted on parental technoference, our scoping review comprises the first comprehensive, systematic review on the impacts of parental technoference on parent-child relationships and children's health and development. Objective: We aim to map, describe and summarize existing evidence from published research articles on the impacts of parental technoference on parent-child relationships and child health and developmental outcomes and identify limitations in the studies or gaps in the literature. Inclusion criteria: This scoping review will include primary research studies and review papers (i.e., systematic, scoping) that evaluate the impacts of parental technoference on parent-child relationships and children's health and developmental outcomes. In our review, parents are defined as primary caregivers (i.e., biological, adopted, foster parents) of children under the age of 18 years. Methods: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Databases will include APA PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Central, Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews, JBI EBP and Embase (OVID). CINAHL (Ebsco) and Scopus will also be searched. Grey and popular literature will be excluded, with the exception of dissertations. Studies will be written in English with no time limit. Two reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts of studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles will be appraised with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data will be extracted into a data charting table including; author(s), year of publication, country, research aim, methodology/design, population and sample size, variables/concepts and corresponding measures and main results. Data will mapped and presented in tables and figures along with a corresponding narrative summary. Significance: This review will illuminate the current state of evidence and identify gaps in the literature on the impacts of technoference on parent-child relationships and children’s health and development. The findings from this review will inform future research to enhance understanding of the impacts of parental technoference and aid in the development of interventions and programs to promote positive parent-child relationships and children’s health and development in an increasingly digital world.
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.
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 | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découle