MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2778296742 · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2017.10.034

Total recall in the SCAMP cohort: Validation of self-reported mobile phone use in the smartphone era

2017· article· en· W2778296742 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaMRC-PHE Centre for Environment and HealthKing's College LondonNational Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research UnitNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchImperial College Healthcare NHS TrustImperial College LondonPublic Health EnglandDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsMobile phonePhoneCohortMobile telephonyKappaComputer scienceMedicinePsychologyTelecommunicationsStatisticsMathematicsMobile radio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile phone use, predominantly smartphones, is almost ubiquitous amongst both adults and children. However adults and children have different usage patterns. A major challenge with research on mobile phone use is the reliability of self-reported phone activity for accurate exposure assessment. We investigated the agreement between self-reported mobile phone use data and objective mobile operator traffic data in a subset of adolescents aged 11-12 years participating in the Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (SCAMP) cohort. We examined self-reported mobile phone use, including call frequency, cumulative call time duration and text messages sent among adolescents from SCAMP and matched these data with records provided by mobile network operators (n = 350). The extent of agreement between self-reported mobile phone use and mobile operator traffic data use was evaluated using Cohen's weighted Kappa (ĸ) statistics. Sensitivity and specificity of self-reported low (< 1 call/day, ≤ 5min of call/day or ≤ 5 text messages sent/day) and high (≥ 11 calls/day, > 30min of call/day or ≥ 11 text messages sent /day) use were estimated. Agreement between self-reported mobile phone use and mobile operator traffic data was highest for the duration spent talking on mobile phones per day on weekdays (38.9%) and weekends (29.4%) compared to frequency of calls and number of text messages sent. Adolescents overestimated their mobile phone use during weekends compared to weekdays. Analysis of agreement showed little difference overall between the sexes and socio-economic groups. Weighted kappa between self-reported and mobile operator traffic data for call frequency during weekdays was κ = 0.12, 95% CI 0.06-0.18. Of the three modes of mobile phone use measured in the questionnaire, call frequency was the most sensitive for low mobile phone users on weekdays and weekends (77.1, 95% CI: 69.3-83.7 and 72.0, 95% CI: 65.0-78.4, respectively). Specificity was moderate to high for high users with the highest for call frequency during weekdays (98.4, 95% CI: 96.4-99.5). Despite differential agreement between adolescents' self-reported mobile phone use and mobile operator traffic data, our findings demonstrate that self-reported usage adequately distinguishes between high and low use. The greater use of mobile smartphones over Wi-Fi networks by adolescents, as opposed to mobile phone networks, means operator data are not the gold standard for exposure assessment in this age group. This has important implications for epidemiologic research on the health effects of mobile phone use in adolescents.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it