Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42873397›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2026

Contextualizing Trends in Television Viewing and Computer Use Among U.S. Children Aged 5-11 Years, 2001-2018.

Ashley W Kranjac, Dinko Kranjac

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Ashley W KranjacDepartment of Sociology, Wilkinson College, Chapman University, One University Dr., Orange, CA, 92866, USA. kranjac@chapman.edu.
Dinko KranjacPsychology Program, College of Health and Community Well-Being, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionExcessive screen time among children is linked to adverse physical, mental, and developmental outcomes. The putative drivers of increasing screen time among school-aged children in the United States remain unclear. Population-level changes may arise from intracohort change (IC)-change in average screen time across survey cycles-or cohort replacement (CR), as later-born cohorts with different levels of screen time replace earlier-born cohorts.

methodsWe analyzed nine 2-year National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cycles from 2001 to 2002 through 2017-2018, including 9,841 children aged 5-11 years old. Screen time was measured as the sum of proxy-reported estimates of daily hours of TV/video viewing and computer use. Using linear and algebraic decomposition techniques, we partitioned total change (TC) in screen time into IC and CR components. Models adjusted for demographic, wellness, family, and food security factors.

resultsThe weighted mean estimated daily screen time increased from 2.95 to 4.26 h (Δ = 1.31;44%). Boys consistently had higher proxy-reported mean screen time than girls. In the unadjusted model, IC contributed positively to the increase in screen time, whereas CR partially offset it. These opposing contributions persisted across all adjustment models. DISCUSSION: Combined estimated daily screen time among U.S. children aged 5-11 years increased significantly between 2001 and 2018. Increases within birth cohorts were the main source of this rise, while cohort replacement partially offset it. Differences in screen time across birth cohorts were shaped by changing demographics and family environments.

Indexed as

ChildrenCohortDecompositionDigital mediaNHANESScreen timeStatistics

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.