MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386983356 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxad055.010

10 Paediatricians’ Awareness of Canadian Screen Time Guidelines, Perception of Screen Time Use, and Counseling during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2023· article· en· W4386983356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kiersten Amos, Andrea Ens, Jacqueline Ogilvie, Michelle Ponti, Michael R. Miller, Fanyu Yang

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScreen timeMedicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Family medicinePerceptionPediatricsPsychologyPhysical activityDiseasePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Paediatricians are essential for guiding families on screen time use as digital media become increasingly prevalent, particularly through the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is no literature on paediatrician awareness of Canadian guidelines or on perception of these guidelines during the pandemic. Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and comfort of paediatricians with the Canadian Paediatric Society’s (CPS) screen time guidelines, specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design/Methods Our survey was developed by a paediatric resident and paediatric endocrinologist, reviewed by local experts, and sent electronically to members of the Community and Developmental Paediatrics Sections of the CPS. Results All 53 respondents were aware of current CPS screen time guidelines, and the majority had fair to excellent knowledge of guidance for both age groups (<5 years, and school-aged children and adolescents). Over 80% noticed increased screen time use during the pandemic, and 98% were somewhat or very concerned about screen time use and their patients’ health or well-being. Qualitative data indicated paediatricians were concerned about associations between increased screen time with worsening behaviour, mental health concerns, obesity, and sedentary lifestyle. The greatest implementation barrier was perceived to be insufficient motivation or support from caregivers/families. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that paediatricians are highly knowledgeable and comfortable with current screen time guidelines, and frequently counsel their patients accordingly. Despite this, paediatricians are increasingly concerned with negative health outcomes associated with screen time use. We hope these results empower paediatricians to continue counseling patients and encourage further local advocacy and public education around increased screen time and related health risks in children.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207