Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37695451›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2024

Neuropsychological Deficits in Disordered Screen Use Behaviours: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Michoel L Moshel, Wayne A Warburton, Jennifer Batchelor, Joanne M Bennett, Katherine Y Ko

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Unfiltered Access, Unseen Harms: A Developmental and Public Health Critique of Digital Rights Discourse.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  5. European child and adolescent psychiatry in a digital world.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Microbes Saving Lives and Reducing Suffering.Microbial biotechnology · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Michoel L MoshelSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. michoel.moshel@hdr.mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2764-6349
Wayne A WarburtonSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Jennifer BatchelorSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Joanne M BennettSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, Australia.
Katherine Y KoSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last few decades, excessive and disordered screen use has become more prevalent, prompting investigations into its associated consequences. The extent to which disordered screen use behaviours impact neuropsychological functioning has been reportedly mixed and at times inconsistent. This review sought to synthesise the literature and estimate the magnitude of overall cognitive impairment across a wide range of disordered screen use behaviours. We also sought to determine the cognitive domains most impacted, and whether the observed impairments were moderated by the classification of screen-related behaviours (i.e., Internet or gaming) or the format of cognitive test administration (i.e., paper-and-pencil or computerised). A systematic search of databases (Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE) identified 43 cross-sectional articles that assessed neuropsychological performance in disordered screen use populations, 34 of which were included in the meta-analysis. A random-effects meta-analysis revealed significant small/medium (g = .38) cognitive deficits for individuals with disordered screen use behaviours relative to controls. The most affected cognitive domain with a significant medium effect size (g = .50) was attention and focus followed by a significant reduction in executive functioning (g = .31). The classification of disordered screen use behaviours into Internet or gaming categories or the format of cognitive testing did not moderate these deficits. Additionally, excluding disordered social media use in an exploratory analysis had little effect on the observed outcomes. This study highlights a number of methodological considerations that may have contributed to disparate findings and shows that disordered screen use can significantly impact cognitive performance. Recommendations for future research are also discussed. Data for this study can be found at https://osf.io/upeha/ .

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionExecutive FunctionHumansNeuropsychological TestsVideo GamesAddiction gaming disorderAttention and focusCognitive testingExecutive functionInternet addiction disorderInternet gaming disorder

Identifiers

PMID37695451
PMCPMC11473542

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.