Parents’ Perceptions of Their Children’s Engagement in a Consumer-Based Meditation Mobile App: Cross-Sectional Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the United States, nearly half (48%) of school-aged children experience sleep disturbance that results in less than the recommended sleep duration, which may negatively impact mental health and behavior. Mindfulness interventions may improve sleep and mental health in youth. However, there are gaps in the literature regarding how children (2-12 years) and adolescents (13-17 years) practice mindfulness and the extent to which they benefit from these practices. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine parents' perceptions of their children's engagement with a consumer-based mindfulness meditation app and the extent to which they believe their children have benefitted from using the app, particularly with regard to sleep. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey in adult subscribers (N=11,108) to the mindfulness meditation mobile app Calm. Participants who indicated that they had a child or children younger than 18 years (2944/11,108) who used the Calm app were asked additional questions related to their perceptions of their children's engagement with Calm. Descriptive statistics were used to assess children's app engagement, and chi-square tests and binary logistic regression models were used to assess differences in children's usage based on gender and age. RESULTS: Among the survey respondents, approximately half of the parents (1537/2944, 52.21%) reported that their children used Calm. Children used Calm mostly for (1) sleep (1168/1537, 75.99%), (2) stress (491/1537, 31.95%), (3) depression or anxiety (430/1537, 27.98%), and (4) improvement of overall health (215/1537,13.99%). Older children were more likely to begin using Calm to reduce stress, depression, or anxiety, whereas younger children were more likely begin using Calm to improve sleep. Most children used Calm when lying down to go to bed (1113/1529, 72.79%). Children were most likely to use sleep stories at night (1144/1207, 94.78%), followed by music and soundscapes (749/1114, 67.24%), meditations (736/1120, 65.71%), and breathing exercises (610/1092, 55.86%). Nearly all parents believed that using sleep stories was helpful for their children's sleep (1090/1128, 96.63%), and the majority of parents felt that the other components were also helpful for their children's sleep (music and soundscapes [570/728, 78.30%], meditations [445/696, 63.94%], and breathing exercises [610/1092, 55.86%]). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore parents' perceptions of how their children or adolescents use a popular consumer-based mindfulness mobile app (ie, Calm). As the majority of children use the app for sleep, mindfulness meditation mobile apps should consider incorporating age-appropriate sleep content to meet the needs of this audience. More research is needed to confirm the feasibility and effectiveness of mindfulness meditation apps for improving sleep and mental health in children and 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".