MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414567986 · doi:10.1016/j.ajoint.2025.100177

Association between screen time and guardian-reported vision difficulty in children and adolescents: A population-based analysis

2025· article· en· W4414567986 on OpenAlex
Andrew Mihalache, Panthea Rahmdel, Ryan S. Huang, Marko M. Popovic, Behnam Rahmdel, Stacey Chong, Crystal S.Y. Cheung, Rajeev H. Muni

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAJO International · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOddsOdds ratioAssociation (psychology)Screen timeLogistic regressionConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate associations between screen time and guardian-reported vision difficulties among paediatric populations in the United States. Retrospective, population-based, cross-sectional study. Using data from the 2020 and 2022 National Health Interview Survey, this study included participants aged 2-17 years with complete guardian-reported data pertaining to vision status and screen time usage. We performed logistic regressions to explore associations between screen time and vision difficulties, reporting odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 5,112 participants (mean age: 10.1 ± 4.7 years) were included in 2020, and 6,473 participants (mean age: 9.9 ± 4.7 years) were included in 2022. In our univariable analysis, children who had a screen time of >2 hours/day had a higher odds of guardian-reported vision difficulty in 2020 (OR=1.53, 95%CI=[1.08, 2.16], p=0.017) and in 2022 (OR=1.38, 95%CI=[1.02, 1.86], p=0.038). These findings were consistent in a subgroup of female children (p=0.002 in 2020 and p=0.014 in 2022). Our multivariable analysis of 2020 data found that the odds of guardian-reported vision difficulty among children with a screen time of >2 hours/day was significantly higher in females (OR=1.73, 95%CI=[1.02, 2.93], p=0.040) and children residing in the Midwest (OR=2.41, 95%CI=[1.11, 5.20], p=0.026). No findings were significant in our adjusted analysis of 2022 data. Screen time was associated with guardian-reported vision difficulties in paediatric populations in the United States in our univariable analysis. However, this association was not consistently observed in adjusted models of 2020 data, and no associations remained significant in the multivariable analysis of 2022 data. Public health initiatives aimed at promoting healthy screen time habits and regular eye care among vulnerable groups of children and adolescents are encouraged.

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.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.251 · 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