ArticleJournal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors2026
Not all screen time is sedentary: evidence from aligned smartphone sensing and accelerometry data in adults.
Article in Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors, 2026. 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.
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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreen time is frequently used as a proxy for sedentary behaviour in physical activity and public health research, an assumption largely derived from television viewing. However, because smartphones are portable, screentime can occur across diverse physical contexts. This raises uncertainty about whether it reliably reflects sedentary behaviour at the momentary level.
methodsThis opportunistic analysis used data from an ongoing cohort study of adult caregivers of preschool-aged children. Smartphone screen time was objectively assessed using the Android-based passive sensing app Chronicle, and movement behaviour was assessed using wrist-worn accelerometers. Accelerometer data were processed using GGIR and the SedUp algorithm to classify epochs as sedentary or non-sedentary. Smartphone and movement data were aligned at 5-s epochs during waking wear time. Primary outcomes included the proportion of smartphone screen-use time occurring during sedentary versus non-sedentary behaviour. Secondary analyses examined inactive versus active behaviour during non-sedentary screen use, and app-level differences.
resultsThe analytic sample included 63 participants contributing 785 person-days (3.3-million 5-s epochs). At the participant level, the median proportion of smartphone use occurring during non-sedentary behaviour was 25.9%, with substantial inter-individual variability (range: 5.6-73.7%). Among non-sedentary screen-use epochs, 52.1% occurred during inactive behaviour and 47.9% occurred during active behaviour. App-level analyses revealed that social media applications were predominantly sedentary, whereas apps such as Phone, Maps, Camera, and YouTube showed higher proportions of non-sedentary use.
conclusionsSmartphone screen time fails as a momentary proxy for sedentary behaviour because a substantial, variable, and app-dependent proportion occurs during non-sedentary behaviour. These findings may have implications for both the measurement and development of interventions aimed at reducing sedentary behaviour and/or smartphone 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.