The Impact of Parental Behaviors on Children’s Lifestyle, Dietary Habits, Screen Time, Sleep Patterns, Mental Health, and BMI: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Childhood obesity and being overweight are influenced by the family environment, diet, sleep, and mental health, with parents playing a key role in shaping behaviors through routines and practices. Healthy parental habits can encourage positive outcomes, while poor routines and stress often lead to unhealthy weight gain. This study analyzed the impact of parental behaviors on children's lifestyles and habits, as well as the trend and intensity of the effect of these behaviors on different age groups. METHODS: A systematic review of 1504 articles from Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and APA PsycNet (as of 22 July 2024) included studies on parents and children aged 4-18 years, focusing on physical activity, sleep, screen time, nutrition, and mental health. Twenty-six studies were analyzed, including 19 cross-sectional and 7 longitudinal studies. The outcomes included physical activity, sedentary behaviors, eating and sleeping habits, mental health, and BMI. Bias was assessed using JBI tools according to the GRADE framework and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment. RESULTS: The studies involved 89,545 youths and 13,856 parents. The key findings revealed associations between parental physical activity, sleep, dietary habits, mental health, screen time, and their children's BMIs. Parenting styles significantly influence children's behaviors. This review highlights the crucial influence of parenting styles and behaviors on children's physical activity, diet, sleep, and mental health, emphasizing the link between family dynamics and childhood obesity. The findings stress the importance of targeting parental habits in interventions focused on healthy routines and stress management. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine causality, while research involving diverse populations is essential to enhance the applicability of these findings.
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 | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".