Peer Review #2 of "Family structure as a predictor of screen time among youth (v0.2)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family plays a central role in the development of health-related behaviors among youth.The objective of this study was to determine whether non-traditional parental structure and shared custody arrangements predict how much time youth spend watching television, using a computer recreationally, and playing video games.Participants were a nationally representative sample of Canadian youth (N = 26,068) in grades 6-10 who participated in the 2009/10 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children Survey.Screen time in youth from single parent and reconstituted families, with or without regular visitation with their non-residential parent, was compared to that of youth from traditional dualparent families.Multiple imputation was used to account for missing data.After multiple imputation, the relative odds of being in the highest television, computer use, video game, and total screen time quartiles were not different in boys and girls from non-traditional families by comparison to boys and girls from traditional dual-parent families.In conclusion, parental structure and child custody arrangements did not have a meaningful impact on screen time among youth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.172 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.259 | 0.112 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".