Lanzamiento Enero 2027

Estudio2020Acceso abierto

Psychological impacts of "screen time" and "green time" for children and adolescents: A systematic scoping review

Oswald TK, Rumbold AR, Kedzior SGE, Moore VM

PloS one · 139 citas

Cómo se estudió

Diseño
Revisión sistemática (clasificado por nuestro filtro de IA)
Estudiado en
Personas
Resultado principal
Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento

Quién lo pagó

Financiación
Financiación independiente
Gobierno
Australian Government

Según 1 financiador declarado y la declaración de financiación del texto completo.

Publicación

Publicado
2020-09-04 · PLoS One · vol. 15 · número 9 · pág. e0237725
Editorial
Public Library of Science
Citado
371 citas · más que el 100% de estudios similares · 64.2× el promedio de su campo
Impacto
Entre el 10 % más citado de su campo
Referencias
270 trabajos
Acceso
Acceso abierto (revista) · CC-BY
Áreas de investigación
Child Development and Digital Technology · Urban Green Space and Health · Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research
Palabras clave
screen time, green time, nature exposure, children and adolescents, youth mental health, psychological well-being, cognitive function, academic performance, socioeconomic disparities
MeSH
humans, language, psychology, geography, nature, socioeconomic factors, publications, adolescent, child, screen time

4 autores

  • Tassia Kate Oswald🇦🇺 · autor de correspondenciaThe University of Adelaide
  • Alice R. Rumbold🇦🇺South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute; The University of Adelaide
  • Sophie G. E. Kedzior🇦🇺The University of Adelaide
  • Vivienne Moore🇦🇺The University of Adelaide

Resumen

El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.

Technological developments in recent decades have increased young people's engagement with screen-based technologies (screen time), and a reduction in young people's contact with nature (green time) has been observed concurrently. This combination of high screen time and low green time may affect mental health and well-being. The aim of this systematic scoping review was to collate evidence assessing associations between screen time, green time, and psychological outcomes (including mental health, cognitive functioning, and academic achievement) for young children (<5 years), schoolchildren (5-11 years), early adolescents (12-14 years), and older adolescents (15-18 years). Original quantitative studies were identified in four databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus, Embase), resulting in 186 eligible studies. A third of included studies were undertaken in Europe and almost as many in the United States. The majority of studies were cross-sectional (62%). In general, high levels of screen time appeared to be associated with unfavourable psychological outcomes while green time appeared to be associated with favourable psychological outcomes. The ways screen time and green time were conceptualised and measured were highly heterogeneous, limiting the ability to synthesise the literature. The preponderance of cross-sectional studies with broadly similar findings, despite heterogeneous exposure measures, suggested results were not artefacts. However, additional high-quality longitudinal studies and randomised controlled trials are needed to make a compelling case for causal relationships. Different developmental stages appeared to shape which exposures and outcomes were salient. Young people from low socioeconomic backgrounds may be disproportionately affected by high screen time and low green time. Future research should distinguish between passive and interactive screen activities, and incidental versus purposive exposure to nature. Few studies considered screen time and green time together, and possible reciprocal psychological effects. However, there is preliminary evidence that green time could buffer consequences of high screen time, therefore nature may be an under-utilised public health resource for youth psychological well-being in a high-tech era.

Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).

Confianza de la comunidad

Cargando…

¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?

0 · nada10 · totalmente

Comentarios

¿Algo está mal aquí?

Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.

Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.