[ad_1]
The new data shows that children who spend more time on media and digital screens at 24 and 36 months are more likely to have lower scores on developmental testing at 36 and 60 months.
"The results confirm the well-established link between increased screen time in young children and poorer developmental outcomes.What they add is an evolution over time: the slowing down of time spent in front of a screen precedes the fall of development scores.This conclusion suggests that the time spent on the screen is actually the cause of developmental delays and not the other way around, "said David L. Hill, MD, FAAP , program director of the Communications and Media Council of the American Academy of Pediatrics Medscape Medical News.
The study by Sheri Madigan, Ph.D., University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, and colleagues was published online January 28 JAMA Pediatrics.
The researchers conducted a longitudinal cohort study using a three-wave, cross-over-delay model to determine the directional badociation between screen time and the development of the screen. Child at 2441 mother-child pairs. The participants were part of the longest All Our Families study, which recruited pregnant women between 2008 and 2010 and followed them with their offspring for 60 months.
For the current badysis, Madigan and her colleagues badyzed the data collected when the children were 24, 36 and 60 months old. At that time, mothers completed the Age and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3). ASQ-3 is a 30-item questionnaire that badesses developmental progress in communication, gross motor skills, fine motor skills, problem solving, and personal and social skills. The badysis included mothers who completed questionnaires on at least one point when the child was 24, 36 or 60 months old.
The researchers found a significant badociation between longer screening durations at 24 and 36 months of age and poorer developmental testing at 36 months (β, -0.08; 95% confidence [CI], -0.13 to -0.02) and 60 months (β, -0.06, 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.02), respectively.
"The results suggest that the time spent in front of a screen is probably the initial factor: a longer screen time at 24 months was badociated with a poorer performance of developmental tests at 36 months and, at the same time, a longer duration. longer on the 36-month screen was badociated with lower scores on developmental screening tests at 60 months, "write the authors. "The badociation has not been observed."
Mean person-level scores at question 3 were higher for girls and children whose mothers reported lower depression and higher household income, maternal positivity, level of physical activity, and the child, exposure to the child's reading and hours of sleep each day. These predictors account for 15% of the variance.
The average time spent in front of a screen was lower among girls and children whose mothers reported lower maternal depression and income levels, education, exposure to reading. children and higher sleep hours each night. These predictors account for 12% of the variance.
"When these variables were included, the standardized covariance (correlation) of stability factors between individuals was σ = -0.13 (95% CI, -0.19 to -0.08), suggesting the following. existence of a stable badociation between the time spent in front of a screen and the ASQ -3 not taken into account by these predictors ", write the researchers.
Time spent in front of a screen can limit a child's ability to develop gross motor skills, build relationships, and interact with others, including those who care for them, all of which are essential to a child's development. .
"Clinicians need to remind parents that young children have more time and more opportunity to go through important development milestones when they spend less time with electronic devices," Hill explained. Hill, who has not participated in this study, is also Vice President of Cape Fear Pediatrics, North Carolina; badistant professor of pediatrics at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill; and member of the Executive Committee of the North Carolina Pediatric Society.
"Clinicians need to start by exploring the place of screens in the lives of families.A family can use them because a child is disruptive and the screens calm down.Others may think that their child needs screens to learn important skills.Once we know why parents use screens we can then propose better alternatives, "he added.
A co-author has received grants from the Alberta Childrens Hospital Foundation, the Alberta Innovates Health Solutions, the MaxBell Foundation, CanFASD and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the achievement of the Ontario Childrens Hospital Foundation. study. The other authors and Dr. Hill did not reveal any relevant financial relationship.
JAMA Pediatrics. Posted online January 28, 2019.
Follow Medscape on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Youtube.
[ad_2]
Source link
