ArticleChild: care, health and development2025
Early Years Practitioners' and Public Health Consultants' Perspectives on the Use of Interactive Electronic Devices in Young Children: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Child: care, health and development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07373483 (Interactive Electronic Devices), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Interactive Electronic Devices (IEDs) in the Home: Exploring How Young Children Use IEDs in the Family Home Setting
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physical activity, sleep, dietary habits, and screen time in Bogotá's children post-pandemic lockdown: a mixed-methods study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInteractive electronic devices (IEDs) are ubiquitous in young children's lives. However, research on their impact on learning and development is still limited. The aim of this study was to understand the perspectives of early years practitioners (EYPs) and public health consultants (PHCs) on the use of IEDs in children aged 3-5.
methodsUsing purposive sampling techniques, we recruited four EYPs and two PHCs from children's nurseries and a government organisation in the northwest of England. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data, which were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. Data were analysed using reflective thematic analysis.
resultsEYPs and PHCs noted that although IEDs could negatively impact child development and behaviour, they could also aid in learning. EYPs expressed concerns about the impact of parents' own IED habits on children's communication and social skills. On the other hand, PHCs stressed that substituting outdoor play with the use of these devices could affect children's social and physical skills and reduce physical activity levels, which are crucial for development. Finally, both EYPs and PHCs agreed that there was a need to improve parents' and EYP's knowledge and to develop interactive interventions to promote an understanding of how IEDs should be used with young children.
conclusionEYPs and PHCs acknowledge the potential advantages of using IEDs as a teaching tool for children. However, they have concerns about the long-term effects on communication, social and physical skills and how children are impacted by their parents' use of these devices. To support policy statements, future research should offer further evidence of the benefits and harms of IED use.
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.