Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39102409›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Parental views on their children's smartphone use during personal and relational activities.

Kateřina Lukavská, Roman Gabrhelík

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Kateřina LukavskáDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-0321-0383
Roman GabrhelíkDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-7672-3753

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the negative outcomes associated with smartphone use during personal and relational activities (SUPRA), parents strive to regulate its use among their children. However, media parenting recommendations lack knowledge of parental views on SUPRA and their relative occurrence in youths. This study aimed to (i) estimate SUPRA frequency among children and adolescents, (ii) assess parental dislike (PD) of SUPRA, and (iii) identify predictors of PD of SUPRA. An online survey was completed by 826 parents (49% mothers, age 25-74, Median = 43 years), capturing PD of SUPRA, estimated frequency of SUPRA in their children (49% female, age 6-18, Median = 10 years), parenting styles (warmth and control), parental attitudes toward screen media, and sociodemographic characteristics. The rate of frequent SUPRA was significantly higher in adolescents (2.7-48.1%) compared to children (2.1-27.2%) with odds ratios ranging from 0.67 to 3.04, depending on the activity type. PD of SUPRA was high in parents of children (M = 4.04, SD = 0.66) and adolescents (M = 3.93, SD = 0.71). Linear regression identified being a mother, having higher levels of control and warmth, and less positive attitudes toward screen media as significant predictors of SUPRA dislike. Our study was the first to report the estimated occurrence and parental dislike of smartphone use (SU) during various personal and relational activities, enabling their direct comparison. Experts warn against SU while studying and at bedtime, which frequently occurred in 4-5% of children and 10-12% of adolescents. More attention should be paid to SU during relational (peer/family) activities due to its relatively high occurrence and parental dissatisfaction.

Indexed as

ParentingParentsSmartphoneAdolescentAdultAgedAttitudeChildFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedParent-Child RelationsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39102409
PMCPMC11299814

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.