Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28356094›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

Do the correlates of screen time and sedentary time differ in preschool children?

Katherine L Downing, Trina Hinkley, Jo Salmon, Jill A Hnatiuk, Kylie D Hesketh

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 44 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Measurement of screen time among young children aged 0-6 years: A systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Katherine L DowningInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. k.downing@deakin.edu.au.
Trina HinkleyInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Jo SalmonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Jill A HnatiukSchool of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Kylie D HeskethInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreschool children can spend up to 12 h a day in sedentary time and few meet current recommendations for screen time. Little is known about ecological correlates that could be targeted to decrease specific versus total sedentary behaviour. This study examined whether the correlates of screen time and sedentary time differ in preschool boys and girls.

methodsParents participating in the HAPPY Study in 2008/09 in Melbourne, Australia reported their child's usual screen time and potential individual, social and physical environment correlates. Children wore ActiGraph GT1M accelerometers for eight days to objectively assess sedentary time (<100 counts.min

resultsChildren were sedentary for 301.1 (SD 34.1) minutes/day and spent 108.5 (SD 69.6) minutes/day in screen time. There were no sex differences in screen or sedentary time. In the final models, sleep duration was inversely associated with girls' sedentary time and boys' screen time. The only other consistent correlates for boys and girls were parental self-efficacy to limit screen time and screen time rules, which were inversely associated with screen time for both sexes. Parents reporting that they get bored watching their child play was inversely associated and maternal television viewing was positively associated with boys' screen time. Paternal age was positively associated with boys' sedentary time. Maternal ethnicity was inversely associated and paternal education, child preferences for sedentary behaviour, and parental concerns about child's physical activity and sedentary behaviour were positively associated with girls' screen time.

conclusionsThe modifiable correlates of total sedentary and screen time identified in this study could be targeted in interventions to reduce these behaviours. With correlates differing for screen and sedentary time, and between boys and girls, interventions may also benefit from including behaviour- and sex-specific strategies.

Indexed as

Child RearingExerciseSedentary BehaviorTelevisionAccelerometryAdultAustraliaChild BehaviorChild Health ServicesChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleAccelerometryPaediatricPreschool childrenScreen timeSedentary behaviourSedentary timeTelevision viewing

Identifiers

PMID28356094
PMCPMC5372288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.