IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v8y2024i1d10.1038_s41562-023-01712-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An umbrella review of the benefits and risks associated with youths’ interactions with electronic screens

Author

Listed:
  • Taren Sanders

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Michael Noetel

    (University of Queensland)

  • Philip Parker

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Borja Pozo Cruz

    (University of Southern Denmark
    University of Cádiz
    Puerta del Mar University Hospital, University of Cádiz)

  • Stuart Biddle

    (University of Southern Queensland
    University of Jyväskylä)

  • Rimante Ronto

    (Macquarie University)

  • Ryan Hulteen

    (Louisiana State University)

  • Rhiannon Parker

    (University of New South Wales)

  • George Thomas

    (The University of Queensland)

  • Katrien Cocker

    (Ghent University)

  • Jo Salmon

    (Deakin University)

  • Kylie Hesketh

    (Deakin University)

  • Nicole Weeks

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Hugh Arnott

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Emma Devine

    (University of Sydney)

  • Roberta Vasconcellos

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Rebecca Pagano

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Jamie Sherson

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • James Conigrave

    (Australian Catholic University)

  • Chris Lonsdale

    (Australian Catholic University)

Abstract

The influence of electronic screens on the health of children and adolescents and their education is not well understood. In this prospectively registered umbrella review (PROSPERO identifier CRD42017076051 ), we harmonized effects from 102 meta-analyses (2,451 primary studies; 1,937,501 participants) of screen time and outcomes. In total, 43 effects from 32 meta-analyses met our criteria for statistical certainty. Meta-analyses of associations between screen use and outcomes showed small-to-moderate effects (range: r = –0.14 to 0.33). In education, results were mixed; for example, screen use was negatively associated with literacy (r = –0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) = –0.20 to –0.09, P ≤ 0.001, k = 38, N = 18,318), but this effect was positive when parents watched with their children (r = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.28, P = 0.028, k = 12, N = 6,083). In health, we found evidence for several small negative associations; for example, social media was associated with depression (r = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.19, P ≤ 0.001, k = 12, N = 93,740). Limitations of our review include the limited number of studies for each outcome, medium-to-high risk of bias in 95 out of 102 included meta-analyses and high heterogeneity (17 out of 22 in education and 20 out of 21 in health with I2 > 50%). We recommend that caregivers and policymakers carefully weigh the evidence for potential harms and benefits of specific types of screen use.

Suggested Citation

  • Taren Sanders & Michael Noetel & Philip Parker & Borja Pozo Cruz & Stuart Biddle & Rimante Ronto & Ryan Hulteen & Rhiannon Parker & George Thomas & Katrien Cocker & Jo Salmon & Kylie Hesketh & Nicole , 2024. "An umbrella review of the benefits and risks associated with youths’ interactions with electronic screens," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 82-99, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:8:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-023-01712-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01712-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01712-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-023-01712-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:8:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-023-01712-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.