ArticleBMC public health2025
Measuring screen time among adolescents: test-retest reliability of HBSC questionnaire items across two countries.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing recreational screen time among adolescents is linked to adverse health outcomes like obesity and poor mental health. This highlights the need for reliable tools to monitor screen-based behaviours. The present study examined the test-retest reliability of recreational screen-time items from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) questionnaire across culturally diverse adolescent populations.
methodsUsing a test-retest design with a 2-3 week interval, we collected data from 750 adolescents (48.8% boys, mean age 15.29 years, SD 2.37) in Mexico (n = 233, aged 10-15y) and Czechia (n = 517, aged 10-18y) in 2022-2024. Self-reported time spent on gaming, social networking, video watching, and internet browsing were evaluated using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) for continuous measures and Cohen's kappa for dichotomized outcomes (< 2 vs. ≥ 2 h/day), with analyses stratified by age, gender, and country.
resultsGaming and social networking demonstrated moderate-to-good reliability (ICC = 0.70-0.74, κ = 0.64-0.65, 82-83% unchanged responses). Video watching and browsing were less stable (ICC = 0.52-0.63, κ = 0.41-0.47). Czech primary school students exhibited the highest consistency (ICC = 0.76-0.81), while Mexican students completed the items with lower reliability (ICC = 0.43-0.54). Older adolescents (16-18 years) and girls reported greater stability for gaming and social networking, respectively.
conclusionsThe screen-time items tested in this study showed acceptable test-retest reliability across countries, age groups, and sexes, particularly for gaming and social networking. These findings support their use in global adolescent health surveillance, while highlighting the need for refinement of less stable domains such as video watching and internet browsing. Given that samples were not nationally representative, findings should be interpreted within these specific contexts. Future research should enhance measurement precision and inform public health efforts to monitor and address screen-time related health risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.