MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125956036 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2021.46.6

Problem Electronic Device Use in a Representative Sample of Adults in Ontario

2021· article· en· W3125956036 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mark van der Maas, Hayley A. Hamilton, Jacob Wolpin, Anca Ialomiteanu, Jürgen Rehm, Robert E. Mann, Nigel E. Turner, Gina Stoduto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPopulationDemographyHumanitiesGerontologyMedicineSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing evidence of correlations between the amount of time spent using electronic devices in leisure and negative health outcomes. However, studies often lack indicators of problematic technology use, rarely investigate relationships between such problem use patterns and indicators of poor mental health, and use samples that are unrepresentative of the adult population. Using a representative telephone survey of adults, we applied the Problem Electronic Device Use (PEDU) scale to estimate the level of PEDU in Ontario, Canada, and the associations between PEDU scores and a wide range of outcomes with a series of multivariate logistic regressions. We found an average weekly electronic device use of 15.57 hr, excluding work or school, and moderate to severe problem technology use among 7.9% of the adult population. Moderate to severe PEDU was significantly associated with suicidal ideation, serious psychological distress, problem alcohol use, and treatment for anxiety. Implications for the findings are discussed.RésuméIl existe des preuves croissantes de corrélations entre la durée d’utilisation d’un appareil électronique à des fins de divertissement et les conséquences négatives sur la santé. On note souvent l’absence d’indicateurs de l’usage problématique des technologies dans les études qui examinent les corrélations entre cet usage et les indicateurs de troubles de santé mentale ou qui utilisent des échantillons représentatifs de la population adulte. À partir des résultats d’un sondage téléphonique représentatif mené auprès d’adultes, la présente étude a eu recours à l’échelle d’évaluation de l’usage problématique des appareils électroniques (Problem Electronic Device Use ou PEDU) pour estimer l’ampleur de ce phénomène dans la province (Ontario) et a appliqué une série de régressions logistiques multivariées pour établir des liens entre les résultats PEDU et un large éventail de conséquences sur la santé mentale. L’étude a révélé que l’usage hebdomadaire moyen des appareils électroniques chez les adultes sondés était de 15,57 heures et que 7,9 % d’entre eux rapportaient un niveau modéré à sévère d’usage problématique de la technologie. Des liens significatifs ont été établis entre l’usage problématique des appareils électroniques et plusieurs indicateurs de troubles de santé mentale et de consommation de substances psychoactives. Les implications de ces constats sont discutées ici.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling IssuesSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207