MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392001985 · doi:10.3389/frcha.2024.1293404

Parental use of routines, setting limits, and child screen use during COVID-19: findings from a large Canadian cohort study

2024· article· en· W4392001985 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amanda Lien, Xuedi Li, Charles Keown‐Stoneman, Katherine Tombeau Cost, Leigh M. Vanderloo, Sarah Carsley, Jonathon L. Maguire, Catherine S. Birken

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick ChildrenWestern UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsScreen timeMedicinePandemicCohortDemographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cohort studyPediatricsLogistic regressionGuidelineMillennium Cohort Study (United States)DiseasePhysical activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background An increase in child screen time has been observed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Home environment and parenting practices have been associated with child screen time. The purpose of this study was to examine associations between parental use of routines, limit setting, and child screen time during the (COVID-19) pandemic to inform harm-reducing strategies to limit the potential harms ensued by excessive screen use. Methods A cohort study was conducted in 700 healthy children (3,628 observations) aged 0–11 years though the TARGet Kids! COVID-19 Study of Children and Families in Toronto, Canada from May 2020-May 2021. The independent variables assessed were parent-reported use of routines and setting limits. Outcomes were parent-reported child daily screen time in minutes and whether the Canadian 24-Hour screen time guideline was met, defined as 0 for <1 years, 60 or less for 1–5 years, and 120 or less for >5 years. Linear and logistic mixed-effects models were fitted using repeated measures of independent variables and outcomes with a priori stratification by developmental stages (<3, 3–4.99, ≥5 years). Results A total of 700 children with 3,628 observations were included in this study [mean age = 5.5 (SD = 2.7, max = 11.9) years, female = 47.6%]. Mean change in child screen time before vs. during the pandemic was +51.1 min/day and level of parental use of routines and setting limits remained stable. Lower use of routines was associated with higher child screen time ( β = 4.0 min; 95% CI: 0.9, 7.1; p = 0.01) in ages ≥5 years and lower odds of meeting the screen time guideline in ages <3 years and ≥5 years (OR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.88; p = 0.01; OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.87; p < 0.01). Lower use of limit setting was associated with higher child screen time and lower odds of meeting the screen time guideline in ages ≥5 years ( β = 3.8 min; 95% CI: 0.69, 6.48; p < 0.01; OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.94; p < 0.01). Conclusions Lower parental use of routines and limits during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with higher screen time and lower odds of meeting the screen time guideline among school-age children. Results may help inform strategies to promote healthy screen use in this age group.

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)0.000
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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Child and Adolescent PsychiatrySame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207