ReviewPublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2025
Digital screen exposure in infants, children and adolescents: a systematic review of existing recommendations.
Review in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual and Augmented Reality for Cognitive and Language Rehabilitation in Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Views of preschool-age children's screen time among mothers with low incomes.Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43) · 2026Article
- Screen time patterns and cognitive screening outcomes (MoCA-Ina) in adolescents: a cross-sectional study.BMC neurology · 2026Observational
- Predictors of Weekday and Weekend Screen Time in a Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Sample (Aged 12-18 Years).Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Digital Exposure and Skin Health in Children and Adolescents: A State-of-the-Art Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Variations in Macular Pigment Optical Density in Children and Adolescents Depending on Time Spent on Smartphones.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Executive Functioning as a Mediator Between Digital Media Exposure and Communication Outcomes in Children and Adolescents.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Extracurricular activities as a moderator of the association between screen time and executive functions in children.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Translating screen-media guidance into caregiver practices: moving from digital silos to shared spaces for young children.Frontiers in sociology · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This review aimed to synthesise existing recommendations - issued by either United Nations agencies, scientific societies, governmental health authorities, non-profit organisations, or others - on digital screen exposure in infants, children, and adolescents. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: A wide search strategy was utilised - including digital databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science), Google, ChatGPT, reference lists from and grey literature -up to July 2024. Identified documents were categorized by type, issuing institutions, audience, publication year, and age groups. A synthesis of recommendations on screen time quantity was provided, comparing recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) with those from other institutions/bodies. Results: Out of 85,425 records retrieved, 41 documents were identified. Of these, 23 were published by scientific societies, 13 by government/health authorities, two by the WHO, and three by non-profit organisations. In relation to digital screen quantity, most documents aligned: i) for children under 2 years, most documents recommended zero exposure (n = 20/22); ii) for children aged 2-5 years, the majority recommended limiting screen time to 1 h per day (n = 17/21); iii) for children over 5 years and adolescents, the most permissive guidelines suggested a maximum of 2 h per day (n = 8/10). Existing recommendations were either equally strict or more restrictive than WHO guidelines. In regard to the quality of digital screen exposure, 10 key points emerged, along with additional guidance for parents, schools, healthcare professionals, researchers, and industry. Conclusions: There is consensus on the need to limit the quantity of digital screen time for infants, children and adolescents and to ensure good quality exposure. This alignment provides a strong basis for governments and other bodies to agree on local recommendations, as well as strategies to improve their implementation in practice.
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.