From 5Cs to ABC: operationalizing the AAP guidelines into the MEPA-ABC scale for parental mediation of children's digital media use.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Jaroslav Vacek, Michal Božík, Ondřej Hrabec, Roman Gabrhelík, Kateřina Lukavská
{"title":"From 5Cs to ABC: operationalizing the AAP guidelines into the MEPA-ABC scale for parental mediation of children's digital media use.","authors":"Jaroslav Vacek, Michal Božík, Ondřej Hrabec, Roman Gabrhelík, Kateřina Lukavská","doi":"10.1186/s12887-026-07446-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Parental regulation of children's digital media use is central to healthy development, yet existing instruments are often lengthy or only loosely aligned with contemporary clinical frameworks. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formulated the 5Cs of Media Use (Child, Content, Calm, Crowding Out, Communication), which, together with Family Media Plan (FMP), represent six theoretical domains relevant to modern digital parenting. A brief, psychometrically validated measure aligned with these concepts has been lacking. The aim of this study was to validate a theoretically derived measure covering the six AAP domains and to empirically establish a parsimonious three‑factor structure capturing key dimensions of parental digital media regulation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nationally representative sample of parents (N = 2,040) was randomly split into Calibration (n = 1,020) and Validation (n = 1,020) subsamples. We first tested the theoretically specified 6‑factor/18‑item model using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and the whole sample. Due to poor fit and high inter‑factor correlations, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted using the Calibration sample to examine the empirical latent structure. EFA suggested a 3‑factor/7‑item solution, which was subsequently evaluated through CFA (WLSMV) in the independent (Validation) sample. Psychometric evaluation included factor loadings, McDonald's ω, AVE, and discriminant validity (Fornell-Larcker, HTMT). Measurement invariance was assessed across gender. K‑means clustering was used to identify empirical parenting profiles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The theoretical 6‑factor model exhibited inadequate fit, and several domains showed near‑unity correlations. EFA identified a 3‑factor structure, Awareness, Balance, and Content, capturing parental monitoring and rules (3 items), lifestyle balancing (2 items), and active content curation (2 items). This 7‑item scale MEPA‑ABC demonstrated strong fit in CFA (CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.965, RMSEA = 0.094, SRMR = 0.037). Factor loadings were high (0.677-0.950); AVE exceeded 0.50 for all factors, and internal consistency was acceptable (ω = 0.65-0.81). Metric and scalar invariance was established across gender and parental age. Cluster analysis revealed four distinct parenting profiles that varied systematically with child age.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Empirical analyses supported a more parsimonious 3‑factor/7‑item structure rather than the theoretically proposed 6 domains. The MEPA‑ABC provides an ultra‑brief, psychometrically robust tool capturing key parental strategies in digital media regulation. It is suitable for research, screening, and clinical or preventive applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":9144,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pediatrics","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-026-07446-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Parental regulation of children's digital media use is central to healthy development, yet existing instruments are often lengthy or only loosely aligned with contemporary clinical frameworks. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formulated the 5Cs of Media Use (Child, Content, Calm, Crowding Out, Communication), which, together with Family Media Plan (FMP), represent six theoretical domains relevant to modern digital parenting. A brief, psychometrically validated measure aligned with these concepts has been lacking. The aim of this study was to validate a theoretically derived measure covering the six AAP domains and to empirically establish a parsimonious three‑factor structure capturing key dimensions of parental digital media regulation.

Methods: A nationally representative sample of parents (N = 2,040) was randomly split into Calibration (n = 1,020) and Validation (n = 1,020) subsamples. We first tested the theoretically specified 6‑factor/18‑item model using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and the whole sample. Due to poor fit and high inter‑factor correlations, an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted using the Calibration sample to examine the empirical latent structure. EFA suggested a 3‑factor/7‑item solution, which was subsequently evaluated through CFA (WLSMV) in the independent (Validation) sample. Psychometric evaluation included factor loadings, McDonald's ω, AVE, and discriminant validity (Fornell-Larcker, HTMT). Measurement invariance was assessed across gender. K‑means clustering was used to identify empirical parenting profiles.

Results: The theoretical 6‑factor model exhibited inadequate fit, and several domains showed near‑unity correlations. EFA identified a 3‑factor structure, Awareness, Balance, and Content, capturing parental monitoring and rules (3 items), lifestyle balancing (2 items), and active content curation (2 items). This 7‑item scale MEPA‑ABC demonstrated strong fit in CFA (CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.965, RMSEA = 0.094, SRMR = 0.037). Factor loadings were high (0.677-0.950); AVE exceeded 0.50 for all factors, and internal consistency was acceptable (ω = 0.65-0.81). Metric and scalar invariance was established across gender and parental age. Cluster analysis revealed four distinct parenting profiles that varied systematically with child age.

Conclusions: Empirical analyses supported a more parsimonious 3‑factor/7‑item structure rather than the theoretically proposed 6 domains. The MEPA‑ABC provides an ultra‑brief, psychometrically robust tool capturing key parental strategies in digital media regulation. It is suitable for research, screening, and clinical or preventive applications.

从5c到ABC:将AAP指南应用到MEPA-ABC量表中,用于父母对儿童数字媒体使用的调解。
背景:父母对儿童数字媒体使用的监管对健康发展至关重要,但现有的工具往往很长,或者与当代临床框架不太一致。美国儿科学会(AAP)制定了媒体使用的5c(儿童,内容,冷静,挤出,沟通),与家庭媒体计划(FMP)一起,代表了与现代数字育儿相关的六个理论领域。一种与这些概念相一致的简短的、心理测量学上有效的测量方法一直缺乏。本研究的目的是验证一个涵盖六个AAP领域的理论推导方法,并通过经验建立一个简约的三因素结构,捕捉父母数字媒体监管的关键维度。方法:选取具有全国代表性的家长样本(N = 2040),随机分为校准样本(N = 1020)和验证样本(N = 1020)。我们首先使用验证性因子分析(CFA)和整个样本测试了理论上指定的6因素/18项模型。由于拟合差和高因素间相关性,使用校准样本进行探索性因素分析(EFA)以检查经验潜在结构。EFA提出了一个3因素/7项目的解决方案,随后在独立(验证)样本中通过CFA (WLSMV)进行评估。心理测量评估包括因子负荷、麦当劳ω、AVE和判别效度(Fornell-Larcker, HTMT)。测量不变性评估跨性别。使用K均值聚类来确定经验育儿概况。结果:理论的6因素模型表现出不充分的拟合,几个领域显示出接近统一的相关性。EFA确定了一个三因素结构,即意识、平衡和内容,包括父母的监督和规则(3个项目)、生活方式平衡(2个项目)和主动内容管理(2个项目)。该7项量表MEPA - ABC在CFA中表现出很强的拟合性(CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.965, RMSEA = 0.094, SRMR = 0.037)。因子负荷较高(0.677 ~ 0.950);所有因子的AVE均超过0.50,内部一致性可接受(ω = 0.65 ~ 0.81)。在性别和父母年龄之间建立了度量和标量不变性。聚类分析揭示了四种不同的养育方式,随着儿童年龄的变化而系统地变化。结论:实证分析支持更简洁的3因素/7项目结构,而不是理论提出的6个领域。MEPA - ABC提供了一个超简短的、心理测量学上强大的工具,可以捕获数字媒体监管中关键的父母策略。它适用于研究、筛选、临床或预防应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Pediatrics
BMC Pediatrics PEDIATRICS-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
683
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pediatrics is an open access journal publishing peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of health care in neonates, children and adolescents, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书