Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40105453›Full record

SynthesisJournal of primary care & community health

Exploring Problematic TikTok Use and Mental Health Issues: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies.

Lakshit Jain, Luis Velez, Surya Karlapati, Mary Forand, Rajasekhar Kannali, Rao Ahmed Yousaf, Rizwan Ahmed, Zouina Sarfraz, Pearl A Sutter, Christian Anthony Tallo and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Unfiltered Access, Unseen Harms: A Developmental and Public Health Critique of Digital Rights Discourse.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

11 authors.

Lakshit JainUniversity of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA.
Luis VelezUniversity of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA.
Surya KarlapatiOregon State Hospital, Salem, OR, USA.
Mary ForandBoston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.
Rajasekhar KannaliNovant Health Psychiatric Associates-Randolph, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Rao Ahmed YousafFaisalabad Medical University, Faisalabad, Punjab, Pakistan.ORCID 0009-0008-3180-1392
Rizwan AhmedUniversity of Karachi, Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan.
Zouina SarfrazFatima Jinnah Medical University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0002-5132-7455
Pearl A SutterUniversity of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
Christian Anthony TalloUniversity of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
Saeed AhmedSaint Francis Hospital & Medical Center, Hartford, CT, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince its launch in 2017, TikTok has rapidly emerged as a major player in the digital landscape, amassing over a billion active users. Its engaging features have raised concerns about potential problematic use and negative mental health outcomes. Despite increasing scholarly attention, a consolidated understanding of TikTok's problematic use potential and implications remains elusive This systematic review synthesizes empirical research on problematic TikTok use and its impact on mental health.

methodsThis review followed PRISMA Statement 2020 guidelines and conducted a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO databases until July 10, 2024. Keywords included terms related to TikTok use, addiction, and problematic use. Studies were included based on empirical focus and publication in peer-reviewed journals. Data extraction comprised study characteristics, measures of TikTok problematic use, and related mental health outcomes. Quality assessment used JBI, Cochrane's RoB 2, MMAT, CASP, and NOS tools. The protocol was registered in OSF: https://osf.io/cjf97.

resultsThis review included 26 studies, involving a total of 11 462 participants. The pooled prevalence of TikTok use was estimated at 80.19%, with the highest rates observed among people aged 18 to 29 years, where it reached 85.4%. Frequent use of TikTok was closely linked with an increase in symptoms of anxiety and depression, especially in users aged under 24 years. Female users were more likely to experience problematic TikTok use, with 67.3% of such cases found among female university students. Moreover, higher addiction scores were noted among individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and those who had higher levels of neuroticism.

conclusionThe findings of this review highlight the growing concern surrounding the impact of problematic TikTok use on mental health, particularly among younger and more vulnerable populations. It is imperative for stakeholders to prioritize the integration of digital literacy and media literacy into educational curricula. Moreover, the involvement of caregivers through guided mediation and the establishment of clear usage parameters could play a crucial role in managing screen time, particularly for younger users. To improve the current landscape of empirical research, longitudinal and interventional research is warranted.

Indexed as

Internet Addiction DisorderMental DisordersMental HealthAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleSocial Mediadigital addictiondigital literacymental healthproblematic social media useproblematic TikTok usepsychiatrysocial media addictionTikTok addiction

Identifiers

PMID40105453
PMCPMC11924099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.