Observational studyBMC neurology2026
Screen time patterns and cognitive screening outcomes (MoCA-Ina) in adolescents: a cross-sectional study.
Observational study in BMC neurology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdolescent screen exposure is increasing, yet clinically interpretable thresholds for cognitive risk are unclear. This study examined associations between daily screen time and cognitive screening performance and derived a screen-time cutoff associated with cognitive impairment.
methodsWe conducted an observational cross-sectional study (March-April 2022) at a private junior high school in Indonesia during online learning. Students completed digital questionnaires reporting educational and recreational screen time and a directly reported overall estimate; a computed overall (educational + recreational) was generated to assess reporting consistency. Cognitive function was assessed using the MoCA-Ina, with < 24 as the primary impairment threshold based on recent psychometric evidence favoring lower cutoffs for improved classification accuracy.
resultsSixty-seven adolescents were included (34 girls, 50.7%; 33 boys, 49.3%), with median age 13.0 years (12.0-16.0) and median MoCA-Ina 25.0 (19.0-31.0). MoCA-Ina did not differ by sex (girls 25.0 [19.0-31.0] vs. boys 26.0 [20.0-30.0]; p = 0.244). Recreational screen time correlated inversely with MoCA-Ina (ρ = -0.446, p < 0.001), as did overall screen time (ρ = -0.360, p = 0.003), whereas educational screen time was not associated (ρ = -0.061, p = 0.624). In adjusted regression, overall screen time remained negatively associated with MoCA-Ina (β = -0.24 per hour/day; 95% CI - 0.41 to - 0.07; p = 0.007), while age was positively associated (β = 0.96; 95% CI 0.07 to 1.85; p = 0.034). All variance inflation factors were below 2.5, indicating no substantial multicollinearity. ROC analysis showed fair discrimination (AUC 0.66; optimism-corrected AUC after bootstrap internal validation [1,000 resamples]: 0.63) with an optimal cutoff > 8.97 h/day (sensitivity 83.3%, specificity 48.8%, PPV 47.6%, NPV 84.0%); risk of impairment was higher above the cutoff (RR 2.98; 95% CI 1.15-7.72; p = 0.010; OR 4.77; 95% CI 1.40-16.31).
conclusionsHigh daily screen exposure was associated with poorer cognitive screening performance. The > 8.97-hour/day threshold represents a preliminary, hypothesis-generating cutoff that may help identify adolescents at elevated likelihood of cognitive impairment, pending external validation in larger, more diverse samples.
trial registration071/K-LKJ/ETIK/II/2022.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.