Telecommunication devices use, screen time and sleep in adolescents

2018 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 1901

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2018

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Telecommunication devices use, screen time and sleep in adolescents Cabré-Riera A, Torrent M, Donaire-Gonzalez D, Vrijheid M, Cardis E, Guxens M. Telecommunication devices use, screen time and sleep in adolescents. Environ Res. 2018 Nov 1;171:341-347. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.10.036. Abstract PURPOSE: To investigate the association between telecommunication and other screen devices use and subjective and objective sleep measures in adolescents at 17-18 years. METHODS: Cross-sectional study on adolescents aged 17-18 years from a Spanish population-based birth cohort established in Menorca in 1997-1998. Information on devices use was collected using self-reported questionnaires. Mobile Phone Problematic Use Scale was used to assess mobile phone use dependency. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was used to assess subjective sleep (n = 226). ActiGraph wGT3X-BT for 7 nights was used to assess objective sleep (n = 110). RESULTS: One or more cordless phone calls/week was associated with a lower sleep quality [Prevalence Ratio (PR) 1.30 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.04; 1.62)]. Habitual and frequent problematic mobile phone use was associated with a lower sleep quality [PR 1.55 (95%CI 1.03; 2.33) and PR 1.67 (95% CI 1.09; 2.56), respectively]. Higher tablet use was associated with decreased sleep efficiency and increased minutes of wake time after sleep onset [β-1.15 (95% CI -1.99; -0.31) and β 7.00 (95% CI 2.40; 11.60) per increase of 10 min/day of use, respectively]. No associations were found between other devices and sleep measures. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of cordless phone calls, mobile phone dependency, and tablet use were related to an increase of subjective and objective sleep problems in adolescents. These results seem to indicate that sleep displacement, mental arousal, and exposure to blue light screen emission might play a more important role on sleep than a high RF-EMF exposure to the brain. However, more studies are needed assessing personal RF-EMF levels to draw conclusions. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typecross_sectional

Effect directionharm

PopulationAdolescents aged 17–18 years from a Spanish population-based birth cohort (Menorca, established 1997–1998)

Sample size226

Exposuredevice use assessed by questionnaire; objective sleep measured for 7 nights

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

One or more cordless phone calls/week was associated with lower subjective sleep quality (PR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04–1.62). Habitual and frequent problematic mobile phone use was associated with lower subjective sleep quality (PR 1.55, 95% CI 1.03–2.33; PR 1.67, 95% CI 1.09–2.56). Higher tablet use was associated with decreased sleep efficiency (β −1.15, 95% CI −1.99 to −0.31 per 10 min/day) and increased wake time after sleep onset (β 7.00 minutes, 95% CI 2.40–11.60 per 10 min/day); no associations were found between other devices and sleep measures.

Outcomes measured

Subjective sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index)
Objective sleep measures via ActiGraph wGT3X-BT (sleep efficiency, wake time after sleep onset)
Mobile phone dependency (Mobile Phone Problematic Use Scale)

Limitations

Cross-sectional design (associations; temporality/causality not established)
Device use information collected via self-reported questionnaires
Objective sleep assessed in a subset (n=110)
RF-EMF exposure levels were not directly measured; authors note need for personal RF-EMF assessment

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "telecommunication and other screen devices (cordless phone, mobile phone, tablet)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "device use assessed by questionnaire; objective sleep measured for 7 nights"
  },
  "population": "Adolescents aged 17–18 years from a Spanish population-based birth cohort (Menorca, established 1997–1998)",
  "sample_size": 226,
  "outcomes": [
    "Subjective sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index)",
    "Objective sleep measures via ActiGraph wGT3X-BT (sleep efficiency, wake time after sleep onset)",
    "Mobile phone dependency (Mobile Phone Problematic Use Scale)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "One or more cordless phone calls/week was associated with lower subjective sleep quality (PR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04–1.62). Habitual and frequent problematic mobile phone use was associated with lower subjective sleep quality (PR 1.55, 95% CI 1.03–2.33; PR 1.67, 95% CI 1.09–2.56). Higher tablet use was associated with decreased sleep efficiency (β −1.15, 95% CI −1.99 to −0.31 per 10 min/day) and increased wake time after sleep onset (β 7.00 minutes, 95% CI 2.40–11.60 per 10 min/day); no associations were found between other devices and sleep measures.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Cross-sectional design (associations; temporality/causality not established)",
    "Device use information collected via self-reported questionnaires",
    "Objective sleep assessed in a subset (n=110)",
    "RF-EMF exposure levels were not directly measured; authors note need for personal RF-EMF assessment"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "adolescents",
    "sleep",
    "screen time",
    "mobile phone",
    "cordless phone",
    "tablet",
    "actigraphy",
    "Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index",
    "problematic mobile phone use",
    "RF-EMF"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.10.036
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library