ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Consensus-based framework of actions within educational and family settings to promote healthy and safe ICT use among adolescents: a Delphi study.
Article in Frontiers in public 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Adolescents are increasingly exposed to a rapidly evolving digital ecosystem that offers opportunities for learning and health promotion, but also poses risks such as problematic use, health-related misinformation, cyberbullying, and exposure to inappropriate content. Despite growing public concern and regulatory attention, gaps remain in clear, evidence-based guidance to support adolescents, families, schools, and other stakeholders in promoting healthy and safe use of information and communication technologies. The aim of this study was to establish expert consensus priorities to inform policy and public health practice. Material and methods: Between November 2024 and June 2025, a three-round Delphi study was conducted with a multidisciplinary panel of experts. In round 1, experts proposed measures in response to an open-ended question. Responses were organized into categories using researcher triangulation. In round 2, the experts indicated their agreement or disagreement with each measure. In the third round, importance was rated on a 10-point scale (1-10). Consensus was predefined as ≥80% agreement, and very high agreement as ≥95%. A composite relevance variable integrating agreement and importance was used to classify measures into three relevance levels. Results: Of 100 experts invited, 38 agreed to participate. The number of participants who responded in each round was 28 (Round 1), 22 (Round 2) and 17 (Round 3). The experts generated 184 actions grouped into the categories of educational sphere ( Conclusions: This study translates multidisciplinary expertise into a priority multisectoral action framework that emphasizes education and active mediation over predominantly restrictive approaches. The findings provide a basis for the design and implementation of coordinated measures across families, schools, and the community.
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.