You are leaving Medscape Education
Cancel Continue
Log in to save activities Your saved activities will show here so that you can easily access them whenever you're ready. Log in here CME & Education Log in to keep track of your credits.
 

CME / ABIM MOC / CE

Should We Think Twice Before Limiting Kids’ Gaming Time?

  • Authors: CME Author: Charles P. Vega, MD
  • CME / ABIM MOC / CE Released: 2/10/2023
  • Valid for credit through: 2/10/2024
Start Activity

  • Credits Available

    Physicians - maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™

    ABIM Diplomates - maximum of 0.25 ABIM MOC points

    Nurses - 0.25 ANCC Contact Hour(s) (0 contact hours are in the area of pharmacology)

    Physician Assistant - 0.25 AAPA hour(s) of Category I credit

    IPCE - 0.25 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit

    You Are Eligible For

    • Letter of Completion
    • ABIM MOC points

Target Audience and Goal Statement

This activity is intended for primary care physicians, pediatricians, neurologists, nurses, physician assistants, and other clinicians who treat and manage children and adolescents.

The goal of this activity is for learners to be better able to analyze results of cognitive testing among pediatric video gamers and non-video gamers.

Upon completion of this activity, participants will:

  • Evaluate the use of video games among US children and adolescents and the potential health consequences of video gaming
  • Analyze results of cognitive testing among pediatric video gamers and non-video gamers
  • Outline implications for the healthcare team


Disclosures

Medscape, LLC requires every individual in a position to control educational content to disclose all financial relationships with ineligible companies that have occurred within the past 24 months. Ineligible companies are organizations whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, re-selling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients.

All relevant financial relationships for anyone with the ability to control the content of this educational activity are listed below and have been mitigated. Others involved in the planning of this activity have no relevant financial relationships.


CME Author

  • Charles P. Vega, MD

    Health Sciences Clinical Professor of Family Medicine
    University of California, Irvine School of Medicine

    Disclosures

    Charles P. Vega, MD, has the following relevant financial relationships:
    Consultant or advisor for: GlaxoSmithKline; Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, L.L.C.

Editor/Compliance Reviewer

  • Amanda Jett, PharmD, BCACP

    Associate Director, Accreditation and Compliance, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Amanda Jett, PharmD, BCACP, has no relevant financial relationships.

Nurse Planner

  • Leigh Schmidt, MSN, RN, CNE, CHCP

    Associate Director, Accreditation and Compliance, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Leigh Schmidt, MSN, RN, CNE, CHCP, has no relevant financial relationships.


Accreditation Statements



In support of improving patient care, Medscape, LLC is jointly accredited with commendation by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.

This activity was planned by and for the healthcare team, and learners will receive 0.25 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit for learning and change.

    For Physicians

  • Medscape, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™ . Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

    Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 0.25 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine’s (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. Participants will earn MOC points equivalent to the amount of CME credits claimed for the activity. It is the CME activity provider’s responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit.

    Contact This Provider

    For Nurses

  • Awarded 0.25 contact hour(s) of nursing continuing professional development for RNs and APNs; 0.00 contact hours are in the area of pharmacology.

    Contact This Provider

  • For Physician Assistants

    Medscape, LLC has been authorized by the American Academy of PAs (AAPA) to award AAPA Category 1 CME credit for activities planned in accordance with AAPA CME Criteria. This activity is designated for 0.25 AAPA Category 1 CME credits. Approval is valid until 02/10/2024. PAs should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation.

For questions regarding the content of this activity, contact the accredited provider for this CME/CE activity noted above. For technical assistance, contact [email protected]


Instructions for Participation and Credit

There are no fees for participating in or receiving credit for this online educational activity. For information on applicability and acceptance of continuing education credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.

This activity is designed to be completed within the time designated on the title page; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity online during the valid credit period that is noted on the title page. To receive AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™, you must receive a minimum score of 75% on the post-test.

Follow these steps to earn CME/CE credit*:

  1. Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
  2. Study the educational content online or printed out.
  3. Online, choose the best answer to each test question. To receive a certificate, you must receive a passing score as designated at the top of the test. We encourage you to complete the Activity Evaluation to provide feedback for future programming.

You may now view or print the certificate from your CME/CE Tracker. You may print the certificate but you cannot alter it. Credits will be tallied in your CME/CE Tracker and archived for 6 years; at any point within this time period you can print out the tally as well as the certificates from the CME/CE Tracker.

*The credit that you receive is based on your user profile.

CME / ABIM MOC / CE

Should We Think Twice Before Limiting Kids’ Gaming Time?

Authors: CME Author: Charles P. Vega, MDFaculty and Disclosures

CME / ABIM MOC / CE Released: 2/10/2023

Valid for credit through: 2/10/2024

processing....

Clinical Context

The following message is repeated in households containing children and adolescents a million times daily in the United States: “If you don’t a) finish your homework b) clean your room c) feed the dog, I’m taking away your games!”

Parents worry incessantly about the potential negative effects of video games, and children are always quick to reassure us that these games are somehow healthy. And this conversation is taking place increasingly frequently. The authors of the current study cite a 2022 survey of children between 2 and 17 years of age that found that 71% played video games, a 4 percentage point increase since 2018. Video games also have been associated with increased risks for depression and aggression.

However, the link between video games and cognition in children has been more controversial. Previous research has found that video gamers had improved measures of attention and visuospatial working memory capacity vs non-video gamers. The current study uses data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, the largest long-term study of brain development among children, to demonstrate improved cognitive outcomes in video gamers vs non-video gamers.

Study Synopsis and Perspective

School-age kids who spend hours a day playing video games may outperform their peers on certain tests of mental agility, according to a new study published October 24, 2022 in JAMA Network Open.

This case-control study, performed by psychiatrists at the University of Vermont researching kids and gaming, compared cognitive performance and blood oxygen level-dependent signal in video gamers and non-video gamers during response inhibition and working memory.

Children were administered a screen time survey that asked how much time participants were engaged in different types of screen time on typical weekdays and typical weekend days. Screen time categories included in the survey can be found in the figure below.

Figure. Screen time categories

Response choices included none, less than 30 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours, or 4 hours. Non-video gamers were those who reported never playing video games. The video gamer group was selected as children who played at least 3 hours per day (21 hours per week) or more. This threshold was selected as it is above the recommended daily screen time guideline of 1 to 2 hours per day from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Study Highlights

  • The study enrolled 2217 children at 9 or 10 years of age at 21 centers in the United States. Most recruitment was performed in schools, and participants were generally healthy. Participants included in the study had valid neuroimaging and behavioral data. Exclusions included common MRI contraindications, history of major neurologic disorders, and history of traumatic brain imaging.
  • All children underwent a health assessment that included an evaluation for psychiatric and behavioral issues. They also answered survey questions regarding average daily screen time, including video games.
  • Participants completed the Stop Signal Task, which assesses processing speed and impulse control, as well as the n-back task, which measures working memory.
  • Participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during these tests to assess brain activity.
  • The main study analysis compared testing along with fMRI results in video gamers and non-video gamers. The study analysis accounted for demographic variables, as well as behavioral and psychiatric pathology.
  • 1278 children who reported 0 hours of video gaming per week were compared with 800 gamers who played at least 21 hours of games per week. The mean age of children was 9.9 years, and 63.1% were female.
  • Video gamers and non-video gamers had generally similar characteristics at baseline, but video gamers were more likely to be male and have lower parental income.
  • The overall performance on cognitive testing fit within the norms of historical models. Video gamers demonstrated significantly better scores in both the Stop Signal Task and n-back task compared with non-video gamers.
  • Correct answers on the Stop Signal Test were associated with increased brain activity in the bilateral precuneous among video gamers vs non-video gamers. Incorrect answers were not associated with a difference in fMRI studies.
  • Similarly, video gamers had increased brain activity in the bilateral parts of the dorsal posterior cingulate gyrus, subparietal cortex, middle and superior frontal gyri, and precuneus.
  • fMRI study results demonstrated higher activity for video gamers among both girls and boys.
  • Adjustment for behavioral and psychiatric problems failed to alter the study’s main conclusions.

What to know:

  • Children who regularly spent 3 or more hours per day gaming were able to score higher on standard cognitive tests that measured short-term memory and impulse control.
  • Video gaming, which requires active mental engagement, could have some benefits, but it is unclear whether gaming sharpens kids’ minds or simply that children who excel in certain mental tasks are drawn to video games.
  • Gamers also showed higher levels of activity in parts of the brain associated with attention and working memory.
  • There was no evidence that video gamers who played at least 3 hours a day were worse off in terms of mental health, rule breaking, or attention problems than kids who never gamed.
  • The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends screen-time limits, and no changes are being recommended based on the findings, because although the study shows possible benefits, it also does not prove that video gaming and the genre of games played cause no harm.

This is a summary of the article “Association of Video Gaming With Cognitive Performance Among Children” published in JAMA Network Open on October 24, 2022.[1] The full article can be found on jamanetwork.com.

Clinical Implications

  • 71% of US children and adolescents play video games, a 4 percentage point increase since 2018. Video games have been associated with increased risks for depression and aggression, but previous research has found that video gamers had improved measures of attention and visuospatial working memory capacity vs non-video gamers.
  • The current study demonstrates that school-age video gamers performed better than non-video gamers in measurements of impulse control and working memory. These differences were supported by evidence from fMRI of greater brain activity among video gamers.
  • Implications for the healthcare team: The healthcare team can advise children and caregivers that video games may improve certain cognitive functions. However, no changes to recommended screen time limits have been made.

 

Earn Credit

  • Print