Cited by 22Impact of Technology on AdolescentsCOVID-19 and Mental HealthChild Development and Digital Technology

Problematic Internet Use Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Youth in Outpatient Mental Health Treatment: App-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment Study

Open access
Gansner, Meredith, Nisenson, Melanie, Lin, Vanessa, Pong, Sovannarath, Torous, John, Carson, Nicholas·2022·JMIR Mental Health

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Youth with existing psychiatric illness are more apt to use the internet as a coping skill. Because many "in-person" coping skills were not easily accessible during the COVID-19 pandemic, youth in outpatient mental health treatment may have been particularly vulnerable to the development of problematic internet use (PIU). The identification of a pandemic-associated worsening of PIU in this population is critical in order to guide clinical care; if these youth have become dependent upon the internet to regulate their negative emotions, PIU must be addressed as part of mental health treatment. However, many existing studies of youth digital media use in the pandemic do not include youth in psychiatric treatment or are reliant upon cross-sectional methodology and self-report measures of digital media use. OBJECTIVE: This is a retrospective cohort study that used data collected from an app-based ecological momentary assessment protocol to examine potential pandemic-associated changes in digital media youth in outpatient mental health treatment. Secondary analyses assessed for differences in digital media use dependent upon personal and familial COVID-19 exposure and familial hospitalization, as well as factors associated with PIU in this population. METHODS: The participants were aged 12-23 years and were receiving mental health treatment in an outpatient community hospital setting. All participants completed a 6-week daily ecological momentary assessment protocol on their personal smartphones. Questions were asked about depression (PHQ-8 [8-item Patient Health Questionnaire]), anxiety (GAD-7 [7-item General Anxiety Disorder]), PIU (PIU-SF-6 [Problematic Internet Use Short Form 6]), digital media use based on Apple's daily screen time reports, and personal and familial COVID-19 exposure. The analyses compared screen time, psychiatric symptoms, and PIU between cohorts, as well as between youth with personal or familial COVID-19 exposures and those without. The analyses also assessed for demographic and psychiatric factors associated with clinically significant PIU-SF-6 scores. RESULTS: A total of 69 participants completed the study. The participants recruited during the pandemic were significantly more likely to meet the criteria for PIU based on their average PIU-SF-6 score (P=.02) and to spend more time using social media each day (P=.049). The overall amount of daily screen time did not differ between cohorts. Secondary analyses revealed a significant increase in average daily screen time among subjects who were exposed to COVID-19 (P=.01). Youth with clinically significant PIU-SF-6 scores were younger and more likely to have higher PHQ-8 (P=.003) and GAD-7 (P=.003) scores. No differences in scale scores or media use were found between subjects based on familial COVID-19 exposure or hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support our hypothesis that PIU may have worsened for youth in mental health treatment during the pandemic, particularly the problematic use of social media. Mental health clinicians should incorporate screening for PIU into routine clinical care in order to prevent potential familial conflict and subsequent psychiatric crises that might stem from unrecognized PIU.

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 · 10.2196/33114

Cites

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 18 · Cited by 22

Authors
Gansner, M., Nisenson, M., Lin, V., Pong, S., Torous, J., & Carson, N.
Affiliations
  • Cambridge Health Alliance (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Gansner, Meredith
Venue
JMIR Mental Health
Published
2022-01-28
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
e33114
ISSN
2368-7959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205807851
Cited by
22
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Mental Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
problematic internet use, COVID-19 pandemic, youth mental health, outpatient psychiatric care, digital media use, screen time, social media use, depression, anxiety, COVID-19 exposure, coping strategies, PHQ-8, GAD-7

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