Search

Importance: The multifaceted nature of screen use has been largely overlooked in favor of a simplistic unidimensional measure of overall screen time when evaluating the benefits and risks of screen use to early childhood development., Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine associations of screen use contexts in early childhood with cognitive and psychosocial outcomes., Data Sources: PsycINFO, Embase, MEDLINE Ovid, ProQuest, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to December 31, 2023., Study Selection: A total of 7441 studies were initially identified. Studies were included if they examined associations between a contextual factor of screen use among children aged 0 to 5.99 years and cognitive or psychosocial development. Observational, experimental, and randomized clinical trial study designs were included., Data Extraction and Synthesis: All studies were independently screened in duplicate following PRISMA guidelines. Effect sizes of associations (r) from observational studies were pooled using random-effects 3-level meta-analyses. The remaining study designs were narratively synthesized., Main Outcomes and Measures: Screen use contexts included content (child directed and age inappropriate), type (program viewing and game or app use), co-use (or solo use), background television, caregiver screen use during child routines, and purpose. Outcomes were cognitive (executive functioning, language, and academic skills) or psychosocial (internalizing and externalizing behavior problems and socioemotional competence)., Results: Overall, 100 studies (176 742 participants) were included, and of these, 64 observational studies (pooled sample sizes ranging from 711 to 69 232) were included in meta-analyses. Program viewing (n = 14; k = 48; r, -0.16; 95% CI, -0.24 to -0.08) and background television (n = 8; k = 18; r, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.18 to -0.02) were negatively associated with cognitive outcomes, while program viewing (n = 6; k = 31; r, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01), age-inappropriate content (n = 9; k = 36; r, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.04), and caregiver screen use during routines (n = 6; k = 14; r, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03) were negatively associated with psychosocial outcomes. Co-use was positively associated with cognitive outcomes (n = 8; k = 28; r, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.25)., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings show small to moderate effect sizes that highlight the need to consider screen use contexts when making recommendations for families, clinicians, and educators beyond screen time limits; including encouraging intentional and productive screen use, age-appropriate content, and co-use with caregivers.

Background: Early childhood education services (ECE) continue to be a key setting to promote physical activity and limit sedentary behaviour. Thus, the aim of this study was to (1) provide an updated systematic review of correlates of physical activity and sedentary behaviour among children in ECE settings and (2) discuss changes in physical activity and sedentary behaviour correlates among children in ECEC settings over time., Methods: A systematic search of eight databases identified 40 studies published between 2015 and 2023 that met the inclusion criteria. The variables were categorized into four domains (child, educator, physical environmental and organizational). Fifty-eight variables were identified., Results: For data from 2015 to 2023, strong associations were identified in all domains (child, educator, physical environmental and organizational) for physical activity, yet no strong associations for sedentary behaviour were identified. Aggregated data (i.e., combining data from previous review and this review) showed strong associations with children's physical activity and age, motor coordination and sex (child), educator behaviour and presence (educator), presence and size of outdoor environments (physical environmental) and active opportunities and service quality (organizational). For sedentary behaviour, sex, outdoor environments and active opportunities were strongly associated in the combined data., Conclusion: The correlates of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in ECE settings continue to be multi-dimensional and span different domains. Variables such as educator behaviours and intentionality, provision of active opportunities, use of outdoor space and service quality should be the key focus area for improving physical activity and sedentary behaviour levels of young children., (© 2024 The Authors. Child: Care, Health and Development published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Despite a tendency to study executive function (EF) and self-regulation (SR) separately, parallel lines of research suggest considerable overlap between the two abilities. Specifically, both show similar developmental trajectories (i.e., develop rapidly in the early years), predict a broad range of overlapping outcomes across the lifespan (e.g., academic success, mental and physical health, and social competence), and have overlapping neural substrates (e.g., prefrontal cortex). While theoretical frameworks diverge in how they reconcile EF and SR - ranging from treating the two as functionally synonymous, to viewing them as related yet distinct abilities - there is no consensus and limited empirical evidence on the nature of their relationship and how this extends developmentally. The current study examined bi-directional longitudinal associations between early EF and SR, and their longitudinal associations with subsequent early academic skills, in a sample of 199 3- to 5-year-old pre-school children. The adopted measures permitted EF and SR to be modelled as composite indices for these analyses, thereby decreasing task-specific components of these associations. Early academic skills were captured by a standardized direct assessment. Bi-directional associations between EF and SR were found, with both accounting for unique variance in early academic skills 7 and 19months later. The current results provide important evidence to distinguish between EF and SR abilities, yet also for their reciprocal influence in situ and across early development., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Howard, Vasseleu, Neilsen-Hewett, de Rosnay, Chan, Johnstone, Mavilidi, Paas and Melhuish.)