ArticleNpj mental health research2025
Examining measurement discrepancies in adolescent screen media activity with insights from the ABCD study.
Article in Npj mental health research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From school climate to brain development: What the ABCD study reveals about the educational context of adolescence.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Review
- Moderate vs. Excessive Video Gaming: Distinct Neurocognitive and Neural Activation Profiles in Preadolescence.Research square · 2026Article
- Heterogeneous Associations Between Objectively Measured Screen Time and Sleep in Early Adolescence.Technology, mind, and behavior · 2026Article
- What we have learned about adolescent mental health and where we are going after a decade with the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Review
- Digital exposure and health behaviours in adolescents: a cross-sectional study from South India.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Concerns about the accuracy of self-reported screen time persist due to discrepancies with objective measures. This study compared passive smartphone tracking via the "Effortless Assessment of Risk States'' (EARS) app with self-reported screen time from 495 adolescents. Based on self-reports, 94.26% of social media use occurred on smartphones. EARS-recorded social media use was higher (1.64 ± 1.93 h) than past-year self-report (1.44 ± 1.97 h; p = 0.037) but similar to post-sensing self-report (1.63 ± 1.93 h; p = 0.835). Higher picture vocabulary scores were associated with lower odds of under-reporting social media use (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.93-0.99). Both self-reported (β = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.11) and EARS (β = 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03-0.12) measures correlated with externalizing symptoms. They were also correlated with social media addiction (self-reported:β = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.10-0.20; EARS:β = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.11). However, past-year self-report uniquely correlated with internalizing symptoms (β = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.09) and video game addiction (β = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). These findings highlight the value of integrating self-report and objective measures in screen media use research.
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.