SynthesisChild and adolescent mental health2026
Review: Social media use and adolescent mental health - an umbrella review and power analysis.
Synthesis in Child and adolescent mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between social media use (SMU) and adolescent mental health continues to garner considerable attention, yet findings remain inconsistent and contradictory. This umbrella review aims to synthesize recent evidence on this topic and explore whether inconsistencies may be due to inadequate statistical power.
methodsA systematic literature review of peer-reviewed reviews and meta-analyses published between 2021 and 2025 was conducted across PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus. Eligible reviews and meta-analyses focused on SMU and mental health among adolescents, defined as individuals aged 10-24 years. Study-level power analyses were conducted using reported effect sizes from eligible meta-analyses.
resultsSeventy-two reviews met the inclusion criteria, including 20 meta-analyses, 25 systematic reviews, 16 narrative reviews, and 11 scoping reviews. Across reviews, general SMU showed weak and inconsistent associations with both well-being and ill-being, while problematic SMU was consistently linked to ill-being. Seventeen meta-analyses provided 1070 effect estimates from 452 empirical studies for power analyses. Studies examining ill-being and problematic SMU demonstrated consistent negative associations and high statistical power, with all meta-analyses reaching a median study-level power above 99%. In contrast, only 4 out of the 15 meta-analyses using general SMU reached a median study-level power above 80%. Across well-being outcomes, only 4 meta-analyses reached median study-level power above 80%.
conclusionMixed findings in the literature may stem from limited statistical power rather than an absence of real effects, especially in studies of general SMU and well-being. Conceptual precision and adequately powered research are essential for advancing the field.
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.