A systematic review and meta‐analysis of screen time behaviour among North American indigenous populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Screen time (computer, television, video game and smartphone/tablet activity) is associated with increased obesity and other health risks. This systematic review evaluates screen time among North American Indigenous populations and compares it with that of North American Europeans. Electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE and EMBASE) were searched, and citations cross-referenced. Included articles reported screen time among First Nations/American Indians, Métis, Inuit/Alaskan Natives or Native Hawaiians. From 788 citations evaluated, 40 identified articles report television, video game, computer and/or overall screen time. Overall screen time was 3.65 ± 1.26 h day(-1) (n = 2,242, 8 articles) among Indigenous children/youth and 3.61 ± 2.95 h day(-1) (n = 155, 1 article) among adults. Among children/youth, 66.0% (n = 11 256, 9 articles) reported less than 2 h day(-1) of television screen time, while only 52.8% (n = 2,458, 1 article) of adults reported this volume. Screen time was generally greater among male population, youth, First Nations/American Indians and overweight/obese individuals. Indigenous children/youth reported greater overall screen time than North American Europeans (4.81 ± 2.84 h day(-1) , n = 1,182 vs. 3.40 ± 2.81 h day(-1) , n = 2,785; 3 articles; p < 0.0001). Screen time is common among North American Indigenous populations. Further research evaluating interventions to reduce screen time and chronic disease risks is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".