Ebster · European child & adolescent psychiatry 2026 · systematic literature review · n=42 studies (46,912 participants)

Taming the endless scroll? Short-form videos, digital routines and neurocognitive outcomes in youth : a systematic literature review.

Cited 1 times in the scientific literature.

Level 4 - case-series / case-control

Systematic review composed predominantly of cross-sectional observational studies (88%) rather than randomized trials

PubMed 42287412 · doi:10.1007/s00787-026-03083-7 · record verified 2026-08-31

What was done

Authors conducted a systematic review following PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines across four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Reviews) from 2015 to 2025. They examined studies evaluating the relationship between short-form video exposure and neurocognitive outcomes in youth. The review synthesized 42 studies comprising 46,912 participants with a mean age of 16.8 years, consisting of 37 cross-sectional studies (88%), two longitudinal studies, one EEG study, and one MRI study. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using GRADE.

What was found

Heavy short-form video use was associated with small-to-moderate increases in inattention and impulsivity, moderate reductions in working-memory span and self-regulation, moderate elevations in anxiety, depression, and stress, and moderate-to-large elevations in addiction symptoms. Specific effect size values in the abstract were obscured by unrendered text placeholders. Two neurobiological studies linked heavier short-video exposure to grey-matter volume variations in the orbitofrontal cortex and cerebellum, altered resting-state signal synchrony, and reduced P300 event-related potential amplitudes. Supportive environments, digital routines, and digital literacy were identified as protective factors.

Why it matters

This review provides the first dedicated synthesis isolating short-form video interfaces from general screen media in youth. It highlights consistent associations between high-volume scrolling and adverse neurocognitive and affective outcomes.

Limits

The underlying evidence base is overwhelmingly cross-sectional (88%), precluding causal conclusions or determination of directional effects. Longitudinal and experimental evidence is extremely sparse, with only two longitudinal studies and two neuroimaging or electrophysiological investigations identified. Specific quantitative effect sizes and exposure thresholds were unrendered formulas in the source abstract.

Cited by