Cited by 69Impact of Technology on AdolescentsChild Development and Digital TechnologyPhysical Activity and Health

Impact of screen time on mental health problems progression in youth: a 1-year follow-up study

Open access
Wu, Xiaoyan, Tao, Shuman, Zhang, Shichen, Zhang, Yukun, Chen, Kaihua, Yang, Yajuan, Hao, Jiahu, Tao, Fangbiao·2016·BMJ Open

Abstract

Objectives: We examined the relationships between screen time (ST) and mental health problems and also increment of ST and progression of mental health problems in a college-based sample of Chinese youth. Methods: We assessed 2521 Chinese college freshmen from October 2013 to December 2014. At baseline, the mean age of participants was 18.43 years (SD 0.96 years), and 1215 (48.2%) participants reported ST >2 h/day. We estimated multivariable-adjusted ORs by using logistic regression models for the risk of developing mental health problems (anxiety, depression and psychopathological symptoms) and/or progression of these problems, according to baseline ST exposure and changes in exposure at follow-up. Results: At baseline, when ST >2 h/day was compared with ST ≤2 h/day, the OR was 1.38 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.65) for anxiety, 1.55 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.93) for depression and 1.49 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.83) for psychopathological symptoms. The results remained unchanged for depressive and psychopathological symptoms but not for anxiety, after additional adjustment for sex, age, residential background, body mass index, perceived family economy, sleep quality, smoking, alcohol intake, exercise after school and physical activity. When participants who had increased their ST exposure to >2 h/day were compared with those with no change and ST ≤2 h/day, the OR was 1.78 (95% CI 1.12 to 2.83) for anxiety, 1.92 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.83) for depression and 1.93 (95% CI 1.16 to 3.21) for psychopathological symptoms. These associations also remained after additional adjustment. Conclusions: The overall effects are consistent yet small for ST/ST increment on mental health problems and its progression. Given the small effect size of the current results, it remains unclear the degree to which ST is a practically significant risk factor for mental health outcomes. Future studies of high quality are necessary to further examine this association and the direction of causality.

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-2016-011533

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Our findings agree with previous literature about the predominant small effect size, in addition to the large heterogeneity of the studies.

    “Our findings are agreed with previous literature about the predominant small effect size, in addition to the large heterogeneity of the studies [9, 99].”

    From The associations between screen time and mental health in adolescents: a systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as [99]

    The Discussion reports small associations between screen time and mental-health problems in Chinese college students and notes that findings in other studies differ. It does not characterize heterogeneity across studies as large; this is a single follow-up study, not an assessment of study heterogeneity. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. [19]Liu XC, Tang MQ, Hu L Reliability and validity of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Chin J Psychiatry 1996; 29: 103– 7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, X., Tao, S., Zhang, S., Zhang, Y., Chen, K., Yang, Y., Hao, J., & Tao, F.
Affiliations
Anhui Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Tao, Fangbiao
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2016-11
Volume
6
Issue
11
Pages
e011533
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2554359296
Cited by
69
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3
FWCI
11.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81302448)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
screen time, mental illness, anxiety, depression, psychiatric symptoms, first-year students, Chinese youth, sleep quality, physical activity, alcohol and tobacco use
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety, China, Computers, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mental Health, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Risk Factors, Students, Television, Time Factors, Universities, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Young Adult, Self Report

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