A major study analysing nearly 3,000 children enrolled in a US-based digital mental health programme has revealed that elevated screen media use is associated with more severe symptoms of anxiety, depression and behavioural difficulties. But children with higher screen exposure also experienced marginally greater improvements in certain symptoms during therapy, suggesting a complex and context-dependent relationship between technology and mental health outcomes.
The research, published in the journal Frontiers in Digital Health, reviewed data from children aged 6 to 12 years who received care through Bend Health, a digital mental health intervention platform. The retrospective analysis explored how various forms of screen media – such as video streaming, gaming, texting, and internet use – correlated with baseline mental health symptoms and influenced progress during treatment.
At the start of care, screen media use was nearly universal, with 98 percent of children engaging in some form of screen-based activity. More than half of caregivers reported problematic screen use, and nearly a quarter of children were classified as having elevated use, defined as over four hours per day on at least one type of screen media.
Children with higher screen use tended to have worse symptoms of depression and anxiety. Video streaming, internet use, and texting were particularly linked to greater depressive symptoms, while internet use also correlated with increased hyperactivity. Gaming was associated with oppositional behaviours, and video streaming and internet use predicted inattention.
Despite the negative associations at baseline, the study found that most children with high screen time reduced their use over the course of therapy. About 93 percent of those with elevated screen use at the outset showed a decline during treatment, and more than half no longer met the threshold for elevated use by the end of the programme. These reductions occurred even though the intervention itself was delivered digitally and did not explicitly aim to reduce screen time.
Interestingly, children who entered the programme with high screen use showed slightly greater improvements in anxiety and inattention symptoms compared to their peers. This suggests that these children may have responded particularly well to the structure and content of the digital intervention, possibly because of their comfort with technology.
Researchers noted that while excessive screen use is often flagged as harmful, not all digital interactions are equal. Passive consumption, such as watching videos, may have different impacts than interactive forms of engagement like gaming or educational app use. The study underscores the importance of distinguishing between types of screen use and recognising the role of context, content, and user engagement.
The findings offer useful insights for digital health providers and policymakers. Rather than solely focusing on limiting screen time, there may be merit in shaping how technology is used, particularly in therapeutic settings. By integrating healthy digital habits and promoting purposeful engagement, digital interventions could be better tailored to the needs of tech-savvy children.
