Recreational screen time and mental health among Canadian children and youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Higher amounts of recreational screen time have been associated with mental ill-health among children and youth. We examined the association between meeting the 24-Hour Movement Guideline's recreational screen time recommendation of ≤ 2 hours/day and indicators of mental health among children and youth. METHODS: Using the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth (N = 26 986), associations were assessed using age- and sex-stratified multivariate logistic regression. A secondary analysis used incremental amounts of screen time to explore dose-response relationships. RESULTS: Female children (5-11 years) who met the recommendation were less likely to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder (adjusted odds ratio = 0.49; 99% CI: 0.25-0.96) or appear sad/depressed (0.60; 0.37-0.99). Female youth (12-17 years) who met the recommendation were more likely to report excellent or very good mental health, high happiness and high life satisfaction and less likely to report feeling stressed, anxious or depressed or be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. Male youth who met the recommendation were more likely to report high happiness (1.74; 1.40-2.15) and high life satisfaction (1.64; 1.34-2.01) and less likely to feel stressed (0.74; 0.56-0.99) or experience psychosocial difficulties (0.79; 0.64-0.97). Some dose-response relationships were present among youth. CONCLUSION: Adherence to the screen time recommendation was associated with several mental health indicators. Understanding these associations can help inform future research and guide strategies to improve mental health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".