Longitudinal associations between different types of screen use and depression and anxiety symptoms in adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Evidence examining the longitudinal associations between different types of screen behaviours and mental health among adolescents is limited. The present study examined the association between five types of screen behaviours and symptoms of anxiety and depression one year later. This study also assessed how changes in screen time were associated with changes in anxiety and depressive symptoms and whether the observed relationships were moderated by sex. Methods Longitudinal data of 17,174 students in grades 9–12 (53.5% females; mean age: 15.1 ± 0.9 years) attending high schools in Canada from two waves (year 6: 2017/18, year 7: 2018/19) of the COMPASS study were analyzed. Leisure screen time and mental health measures were self-reported. To test if the associations between screen time and anxiety, and depression vary by sex, two-way interactions were examined for sex. Analyses accounted for school clustering, race/ethnicity, sex, age, income, body mass index z -score, and previous year anxiety and depression symptoms. Results There were significant longitudinal associations between time spent on each type of screen and subsequent anxiety and depression symptoms. The strength of the associations varied by type of screen behaviour. Interaction analysis indicated a sex difference for television viewing and anxiety and depression symptoms, and internet surfing and anxiety symptoms. A dose-response relationship was observed between phone talking and anxiety symptoms. Beta estimates indicated that an increase in screen duration was associated with a further increase in anxiety and depression symptoms. Conclusion Higher screen time was longitudinally associated with higher anxiety and depression symptoms at one-year follow-up in adolescents. Time-change associations between screen usage and depressive and anxiety symptoms were observed. Also, associations differed based on sex and screen type, whereby greater increases in screen use predicted greater emotional distress. Findings from this prospective analysis suggest that screen time is an important determinant of anxiety and depressive symptoms among adolescents. Future studies are recommended to help inform programs promoting screen time reduction with a goal to enhance adolescents’ mental health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".