ArticleBMC public health2024
Assessing electronic device use behaviours in healthy adults: development and evaluation of a novel tool.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic exposure of the macula to blue light from electronic devices has been identified as a potential macular health concern. The impacts remain poorly investigated as no validated methods to capture usual device use behaviours exist. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop and validate the Electronic Device Use Questionnaire (EDUQ) against multiple 24-h electronic device use diaries in healthy Australian and United Kingdom adults.
methodsThe EDUQ and diaries were developed to capture device use across categories (television, computer and handheld devices). Over eight weeks 56 Australian and 24 United Kingdom participants completed three questionnaires and eight diaries via online platforms. Tool validity was determined through Bland-Altman plot analysis of mean daily hours of device use between the tools.
resultsThe EDUQ demonstrated poor validity in both cohorts with poor agreement when compared with the diaries. When the device categories were combined, a mean difference between the tools of 1.54 h/day, and 95% limits of agreement between -2.72 h/day and 5.80 h/day was observed in the Australian cohort. Across both cohorts and all device categories the mean differences indicated individuals were more likely to report higher device use through the questionnaire rather than diaries.
conclusionsThe EDUQ is a novel tool and demonstrated the difficulty for participants of accurately recalling usual behaviour of device use. Poor agreement in reported device use occurred across all device categories. The poor agreement may be related to factors such as memory recall bias, and the number of diaries captured not being reflective of usual use. Future studies should look to address these factors to improve validity of device use capture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.