MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404239927 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000448

How can digital citizen science approaches improve ethical smartphone use surveillance among youth: Traditional surveys versus ecological momentary assessments

2024· article· en· W4404239927 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Al-akshar, Sheriff Tolulope Ibrahim, Tarun Reddy Katapally

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanada Research ChairsSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsCitizen scienceSmartphone appSmartphone applicationEcologyPsychologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental scienceInternet privacyComputer scienceMultimediaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ubiquitous use of smartphones among youth poses significant challenges related to non-communicable diseases, including poor mental health. Although traditional survey measures can be used to assess smartphone use among youth, they are subject to recall bias. This study aims to compare self-reported smartphone use via retrospective modified traditional recall survey and prospective Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) among youth. This study uses data from the Smart Platform, which engages with youth as citizen scientists. Youth (N = 77) aged 13-21 years in two urban jurisdictions in Canada (Regina and Saskatoon) engaged with our research team using a custom-built application via their own smartphones to report on a range of behaviours and outcomes on eight consecutive days. Youth reported smartphone use utilizing a traditional validated measure, which was modified to capture retrospective smartphone use on both weekdays and weekend days. In addition, daily EMAs were also time-triggered over a period of eight days to capture prospective smartphone use. Demographic, behavioural, and contextual factors were also collected. Data analyses included t-test and linear regression using Python statistical software. There was a significant difference between weekdays, weekends and overall smartphone use reported retrospectively and prospectively (p-value = <0.001), with youth reporting less smartphone use via EMAs. Overall retrospective smartphone use was significantly associated with not having a part-time job (β = 139.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 34.759, 244.519, p-value = 0.010) and having more than two friends who are physically active (β = -114.72, 95%[CI] = -208.872, -20.569, p-value = 0.018). However, prospective smartphone use reported via EMAs was not associated with any behavioural and contextual factors. The findings of this study have implications for appropriately understanding and monitoring smartphone use in the digital age among youth. EMAs can potentially minimize recall bias of smartphone use among youth, and other behaviours such as physical activity. More importantly, digital citizen science approaches that engage large populations of youth using their own smartphones can transform how we ethically monitor and mitigate the impact of excessive smartphone use.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.139 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Digital HealthSame topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207