ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
The impact of smartphone use on working memory in college students: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Excessive screen time among college students is increasingly prevalent and may impair executive functions, particularly working memory (WM). However, the behavioral and neural mechanisms remain unclear. Methods: A total of 42 college students participated in the experiment and were assigned to either a high screen time group (HSTG) or a low screen time group (LSTG). Brain activity was measured with functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) covering the frontal, temporal, and parietal regions during the 2-back working memory task. Group differences in behavioral performance (accuracy, reaction time, false alarms), task-related activation, functional connectivity, and graph-theoretical network were analyzed. Results: LSTG participants demonstrated significantly higher accuracy and hit rates than those in HSTG, while no group differences were observed in reaction time or false alarm rate. Neuroimaging analyses revealed greater activation in bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC-R: p< 0.001, DLPFC-L: p = 0.007) as well as premotor and supplementary motor cortex (PreM & SMC-R, p = 0.007) in LSTG. Functional connectivity was higher in LSTG at whole-brain (p = 0.047), intra-hemispheric (right: p = 0.022, left: p = 0.049), and inter-hemispheric levels (p = 0.033). Graph-theoretical results further indicated lower clustering coefficient (p = 0.040) and network density (p = 0.035) in HSTG, although global and local efficiency did not differ between groups. Conclusion: High screen exposure is linked to reduced working memory accuracy, weaker prefrontal engagement, and disrupted network organization, which suggests reliance on less efficient neural strategies. Screen use may thus represent a modifiable factor affecting cognition and brain networks.
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.