Describing correlates of early childhood screen time and outdoor time in Soweto, South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Contextual factors are likely to influence whether young children are able to adhere to recommended health behaviours. This study aimed to: (1) describe the social and environmental characteristics of children under five living in Soweto, South Africa; and (2) determine factors associated with screen time and outdoor play in this population. Methods Household surveys were conducted in Soweto to collect data on children's screen time and access to outdoor space, as well as information about the household. A multilevel regression analysis was conducted for each outcome. Results Data on 2309 children aged five or under were included in this analysis. Children used screens for an average of one and a half hours per day during the week, and nearly 2 hours per day on weekends. Almost all (92%) children had a safe space to play inside, while just over a third (34%) had a safe space to play outside. A higher socioeconomic status was associated with less time spent playing outside and more screen time. Conclusion Interventions promoting outdoor play and restricting screen time are essential for improving health trajectories, but need to address structural barriers that exist, in order to protect the safety of children while promoting health behaviours.
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 | 0.001 | 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".