Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39811382›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2025

Social network sites (SNS) an archetype of techno-social stress: A systematic review.

January F Naga, Ryan A Ebardo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

January F NagaDepartment of Information Technology, MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology, Iligan City, Philippines.
Ryan A EbardoDepartment of Information Technology, De La Salle University, Philippines.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Social Networking Sites (SNS) are widely used platforms known for both their hedonic and social connectivity benefits. Although there is considerable interest in understanding how personal technostress affects individual well-being, a significant gap remains in the systematic exploration of this topic within the literature. Methods: This review systematically examined 41 empirical studies from Scopus and PubMed published between 2014 and 2023, following PRISMA guidelines, and assessed for methodological quality using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Only English-language articles were considered to avoid translation complexities. Studies were categorized and coded using the Stressor-Strain-Outcome (SSO) model to examine demographic variations in stressor impacts and coping mechanisms. Results: The findings reveal a complex interplay of technological, behavioral-technological, and social stressors. Technological complexities often exacerbate social stressors like FoMO (Fear of Missing Out) and social overload, resulting in psychological (e.g., anxiety, depression), behavioral (e.g., reduced engagement), and physical strains (e.g., sleep disruptions). Demographic factors significantly influence stress responses, with younger users and women particularly affected. Key intervention strategies identified include digital detox practices, mindfulness techniques, and user-centered SNS design modifications. Conclusion: This review emphasizes the need for targeted approaches to mitigate SNS-induced technostress to foster balanced, health-oriented digital engagement. Future research should focus on developing comprehensive frameworks to address technostress impacts on diverse user groups better and support sustainable digital well-being practices.

Indexed as

CopingSNS strainSNS stressorSystematic reviewTechnostress

Identifiers

PMID39811382
PMCPMC11730205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.