Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39062204›Full record

ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Measurement Method Options to Investigate Digital Screen Technology Use by Children and Adolescents: A Narrative Review.

Amber Beynon, Danica Hendry, Charlotte Lund Rasmussen, Andrew L Rohl, Rebecca Eynon, George Thomas, Sarah Stearne, Amity Campbell, Courtenay Harris, Juliana Zabatiero and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Amber BeynonARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1302-4429
Danica HendryARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.
Charlotte Lund RasmussenARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.
Andrew L RohlARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0038-2785
Rebecca EynonOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
George ThomasARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6908-7974
Sarah StearneARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5278-2532
Amity CampbellARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.
Courtenay HarrisARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.
Juliana ZabatieroARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.
Leon StrakerARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7786-4128

Funding

Australian Research Council CE200100022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role and potential impact of digital screen technology in the lives of children is heavily debated. Current evidence is limited by the weakness of measures typically used to characterise screen use, predominantly proxy- or self-reports with known inaccuracy and bias. However, robust and detailed evidence is needed to provide practical trustworthy guidance to families and professionals working with families. The purpose of this paper is to support researchers to select measurement method(s) that will provide robust and detailed evidence. The paper outlines the challenges in measuring contemporary screen use by children, using a child-technology interaction model to organise considerations. A range of different methods used to measure digital screen technology use in children and adolescents (i.e., questionnaires, diaries, electronically prompted sampling, direct observation, fixed room cameras, wearable/portable cameras, audio recorders, screen-device onboard logging, remote digital trace logging and proximity logging) are described along with examples of their use and constructs typically measured as well as a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of each method. A checklist and worked examples are provided to support researchers determining the best methods or combination of methods for a research project.

Indexed as

childrenmethodscreen usetechnology

Identifiers

PMID39062204
PMCPMC11275073

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.