MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220909943 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v14n4p27

Screen Viewing Behaviour among Children under 2 Years in Fiji: Reasons and the Perceptions of Parents/Caregivers

2022· article· en· W4220909943 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nileshni Devi, Masoud Mohammadnezhad, Amelia Turagabeci

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupScreen timeData collectionPerceptionPsychologyQualitative propertyQualitative researchDistractionPublic healthMedicineDevelopmental psychologyNursingPhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Screen-viewing among children has become a growing public health concern. There is no existing research done in Fiji on children’s screen viewing behaviour, therefore, this study aimed to determine the reasons and the perceptions of parents/caregivers in affecting screen viewing behaviour among children under 2 years in Suva Fiji. MATERIALS & METHODS: This cross-sectional mixed method study was conducted at three randomly selected Maternal Child Health (MCH) clinics among parents or accompanying guardians of children under two years old. Using proportional sampling, 361 participants who met the study criteria participated in this study. Data collection was carried out using a 20-item self-administrated questionnaire for quantitative study and a semi-structured open-ended questionnaire for the qualitative study through two Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). Descriptive analysis was used for quantitative data and thematic analysis was applied for the qualitative data to emerge themes. RESULTS: Most children (32.8%) watched screens several times in a week, regardless of age. The main reason for children’s screen time is that it is a distraction tool (29.9%) followed closely by using it to calm child or to prevent negative behaviour (26%) and education (22%). The study found that most of the parents/ caregivers know that there are negative consequences of screen time on their children. Majority of these parents/ caregivers (66%) however think that the only effect is that related to children’s eye health and are unaware of the other health consequences. About 24% think that there is no negative effect at all on children engaged in screen viewing. The study also found that more than half (56%) of the parents (or caregiver guardians) think that screen viewing below the age of 2 years actually has positive consequences on children. Of these the vast majority (76.7%) think that screen viewing makes their children smart/ helps them to learn from a very young age. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study highlighted the main reasons of screen viewing among children under 2 years.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207