Association of screen time and cardiometabolic risk in school-aged children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Screen use has become a pervasive behaviour among children and has been linked to adverse health outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine the association between screen time and a comprehensive total cardiometabolic risk (CMR) score in school-aged children (7–12-years), as well as individual CMR factors. In this longitudinal study, screen time was measured over time (average duration of follow-up was 17.4 months) via parent-report. Anthropometric measurements, blood pressure, and biospecimens were collected over time and used to calculate CMR score [sum of age and sex standardized z-scores of systolic blood pressure (SBP), glucose, log-triglycerides, waist circumference (WC), and negative high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c)/square-root of 5]. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to examine the association between screen time and total CMR score as well as individual CMR factors. A total of 567 children with repeated measures were included. There was no evidence of an association between parent-reported child screen time and total CMR score (adjusted β = −0.01, 95% CI [−0.03, 0.005], 0.16). Screen time was inversely associated HDL-c (adjusted β = −0.008, 95% CI [−0.011, −0.005], p = 0.016), but there was no evidence that the other CMR components were associated with screen time. Among children 7–12 years, there was no evidence of an association between parent-reported child screen time and total CMR, but increased screen time was associated with slightly lower HDL-c. Research is needed to understand screen-related contextual factors which may be related to CMR factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".