To determine whether duration and content of media exposure in 6-month-old infants are associated with development at age 14 months.

No abstract

This study provides evidence that a pediatric primary care-based intervention program can have an impact on the developmental trajectories of at-risk young preschool children.

We found limited verbal interactions during television exposure in infancy, with interactions reported for less than one-quarter of exposures. Although interactions were most commonly reported among programs with educational content that had been coviewed, programs with educational content were not more likely to be coviewed than were other programs. Our findings do not support development of infant-directed educational programming in the absence of strategies to increase coviewing and interactions.

The goal of this study was to determine whether verbal interactions between mothers and their 6-month-old infants during media exposure (‘media verbal interactions’) might have direct positive impacts, or mitigate any potential adverse impacts of media exposure, on language development at 14 months. For 253 low-income mother–infant dyads participating in a longitudinal study, media exposure and media verbal interactions were assessed using 24-hour recall diaries. Additionally, general level of cognitive stimulation in the home [StimQ] was assessed at 6 months and language development [Preschool Language Scale-4] was assessed at 14 months. Results suggest that media verbal interactions play a role in the language development of infants from low-income, immigrant families. Evidence showed that media verbal interactions moderated adverse impacts of media exposure found on 14-month language development, with adverse associations found only in the absence the these interactions. Findings also suggest that media verbal interactions may have some direct positive impacts on language development, in that media verbal interactions during the co-viewing of media with educational content (but not other content) were predictive of 14-month language independently of overall level of cognitive stimulation in the home.

No abstract

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Pediatric guidelines suggest that infants younger than 2 years avoid screen time altogether, while children aged 2 to 5 years receive no more than 1 hour per day. Although these guidelines have been adopted around the world, substantial variability exists in adherence to the guidelines, and precise estimates are needed to inform public health and policy initiatives.OBJECTIVE To derive the pooled prevalence via meta-analytic methods of children younger than 2 years and children aged 2 to 5 years who are meeting guidelines about screen time.DATA SOURCES Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase up to March 2020.STUDY SELECTION Studies were included if participants were 5 years and younger and the prevalence of meeting (or exceeding) screen time guidelines was reported.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data extraction followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent reviewers extracted all relevant data. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to derive the mean prevalence rates. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines.RESULTS From 63 studies, 95 nonoverlapping samples with a total of 89 163 participants were included. For children younger than 2 years, the pooled prevalence of meeting the screen time guideline (0 h/d) was 24.7% (95% CI, 19.0%-31.5%). Moderator analyses revealed that prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines varied as a function of year of data collection (increased over time), measurement method (higher when questionnaires compared with interview), and type of device use (higher when a combination of screen use activities compared with television/movies only). For children aged 2 to 5 years, the mean prevalence of meeting the screen time guideline (1 h/d) was 35.6% (95% CI, 30.6%-40.9%). Moderator analyses revealed that the prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines varied as a function of type of device use (higher when screen time was television/movies only compared with a combination of screen use activities). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe findings of this meta-analysis indicate that only a minority of children 5 years and younger are meeting screen time guidelines. This highlights the need to provide support and resources to families to best fit evidence-based recommendations into their lives.