ArticleChild and adolescent mental health2025
Debate: What guidance is needed by academics who collaborate with digital companies to improve youth mental health?
Article in Child and adolescent mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Perspectives on Adolescent Suicide and Self-Harm: Findings and Insights From the ASCAPAP Grand Forum.Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Commentary: Suggestions for guidance by academics who collaborate with digital companies - a commentary on Bourgaize et al. (2025).Child and adolescent mental health · 2025Article
- Commentary: How do we get platforms to share data with independent researchers? Regulation alone will not cut it: a commentary on Livingston et al. (2023), Bourgaize et al. (2025).Child and adolescent mental health · 2025Article
- Commentary: Industry collaboration: A call for 'industry literacy' - a commentary on Bourgaize et al. (2025).Child and adolescent mental health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a recent debate piece, Livingstone, Orben and Odgers (Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 2023, 28, 150) asked whether and when it is advisable for academics researching youth mental health to collaborate with digital companies. Such collaborations arise when researchers seek to identify risks and opportunities associated with youth digital engagement or to develop research-based interventions that leverage digital technologies to improve young people's mental health. However, young people's digital experiences, the associated data records and the prospects of testing interventions in situ are often under the control of digital providers and inaccessible to researchers. There is growing optimism that collaboration with companies may allow independent researchers access to proprietary resources along with opportunities to test and scale up beneficial digital interventions. Understandably, such optimism is tempered by scepticism about the processes, trust, and interests at stake during collaboration between researchers and companies. Given these often opposed positions, it is clear that professional guidance is required for academics so they understand the potential costs and benefits of choosing to enter into such collaborations and the terms on which this is advisable. This article highlights what information already exists for researchers and what guidance is needed to ensure that youth mental health researchers can successfully collaborate with digital companies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.