SynthesisAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026
The Relationship Between Social Media Addiction, Depression, Stress, and Anxiety: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Swedish version of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale: A psychometric evaluation among adolescents.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the most recent data about the association between Problematic Social Networking sites use (PSNSU) and depression and anxiety. Moreover, to further extent the literature, we examined the relationship between PSNSU and stress. PubMed/Medline and Scopus were searched from March 2016 to January 2022 to retrieve studies that evaluated the relationship between SNSs addiction and depression, anxiety, and stress. Moderator analyses (meta-regression and subgroup analyses for continuous and categorical variables, respectively) were used to examine variability across studies. Thirty-eight studies (pooled N=29,944; 63.1% females, M
Indexed as
Identifiers
41273570What 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.