The Longitudinal Relationship Between Screen Time, Sleep and a Diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Childhood
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate longitudinal associations between recreational screen time and sleep in early childhood, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) at age 8 to 10 years. METHOD: Questionnaires from 2,768 mother-child pairs from the Dutch KOALA Birth Cohort Study were used. General estimating equation logistic regression analyses examined associations between screen time and sleep at age 2, 4, and 6, and ADHD at age 8 to 10. Linear regression analysis examined associations between television time, sleep and CBCL/2-3 scores at age 2. RESULTS: Longitudinally, neither screen time nor sleep were associated with ADHD. Cross-sectionally, CBCL/2-3 externalizing symptom scores increased by 0.03 with every hour television time (95% CI 0.002-0.05) and increased by 0.02 per hour of less sleep (95% CI -0.03--0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite an association with externalizing symptoms at age 2, screen time and sleep in early childhood were not associated with ADHD. Carefulness is warranted when extrapolating cross-sectional associations at early age to an ADHD diagnosis.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it