Cited by 20Physical Activity and HealthImpact of Technology on AdolescentsSleep and related disorders

Is change in mental distress among adolescents predicted by sedentary behaviour or screen time? Results from the longitudinal population study The Tromsø Study: Fit Futures

Open access
Opdal, Ida Marie, Morseth, Bente, Handegård, Bjørn-Helge, Lillevoll, Kjersti R, Nilsen, Wendy, Nielsen, Christopher, Furberg, Anne-Sofie, Rosenbaum, Simon +1 more·2020·BMJ Open

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is growing interest in the relationship between sedentary behaviour and mental distress among adolescents, but the majority of studies to date have relied on self-reported measures with poor validity. Consequently, current knowledge may be affected by various biases. The aim of this study was to investigate the cross-sectional and longitudinal association between (1) objectively measured sedentary time and (2) self-reported screen time with mental distress among adolescents participating in The Tromsø Study: Fit Futures, in order to see if the association is dependent on mode of measurement of sedentary behaviour. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Sample drawn from upper secondary school students (mean age 16.3 years at baseline) from two municipalities in Northern Norway participating in The Tromsø Study: Fit Futures 1 and 2. PARTICIPANTS: 686 adolescents (54.5% female), with complete self-reported and accelerometer data after multiple imputation. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Mental distress assessed via the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-10 (HSCL-10). RESULTS: Minutes in sedentary behaviour measured by accelerometer showed no significant relationship with mental distress in neither crude, partly adjusted nor multiple adjusted hierarchic linear regression analyses. Self-reported screen time was positively associated with mental distress in all analyses (multiple adjusted, B=0.038, p=0.008, 95% CI 0.010 to 0.066). However, the effect was small. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported screen time was associated with slightly elevated mental distress 2 years later, whereas objectively measured minutes in sedentary behaviour was not, indicating a discrepancy in the results depending on measurement methods.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035549

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [45]World Health Organization Global recommendations on physical activity for health, 2010 Available: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44399/9789241599979_eng.pdf;jsessionid=952EF2FE7000ECC64D066DFA28FBD1D4?sequence=1 26180873

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Opdal, I. M., Morseth, B., Handegård, B.-H., Lillevoll, K. R., Nilsen, W., Nielsen, C., Furberg, A.-S., Rosenbaum, S., & Rognmo, K.
Affiliations
  • UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
  • OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University (NO)
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
  • University Hospital of North Norway (NO)
  • Black Dog Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Opdal, Ida Marie
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2020-02
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
e035549
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3006071760
Cited by
20
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
Helse Nord RHF (HNF1360-17)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
Keywords
sedentary behavior, screen time, psychological distress, adolescents, accelerometer-measured sedentary time, measurement discrepancy, high school students, longitudinal prediction
MeSH terms
Screen Time, Adolescent, Mental Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Norway, Risk Factors, Stress, Psychological, Health Behavior, Sedentary Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review