Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2023 Nov 29:383:e073552.
doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-073552.

Social media use and health risk behaviours in young people: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Social media use and health risk behaviours in young people: systematic review and meta-analysis

Amrit Kaur Purba et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objectives: To examine the association between social media use and health risk behaviours in adolescents (defined as those 10-19 years).

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources: EMBASE, Medline, APA PsycINFO, SocINDEX, CINAHL, SSRN, SocArXic, PsyArXiv, medRxiv, and Google Scholar (1 January 1997 to 6 June 2022).

Methods: Health risk behaviours were defined as use of alcohol, drugs, tobacco, electronic nicotine delivery systems, unhealthy dietary behaviour, inadequate physical activity, gambling, and anti-social, sexual risk, and multiple risk behaviours. Included studies reported a social media variable (ie, time spent, frequency of use, exposure to health risk behaviour content, or other social media activities) and one or more relevant outcomes. Screening and risk of bias assessments were completed independently by two reviewers. Synthesis without meta-analysis based on effect direction and random-effects meta-analyses was used. Effect modification was explored using meta-regression and stratification. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations).

Results: Of 17 077 studies screened, 126 were included (73 included in meta-analyses). The final sample included 1 431 534 adolescents (mean age 15.0 years). Synthesis without meta-analysis indicated harmful associations between social media and all health risk behaviours in most included studies, except inadequate physical activity where beneficial associations were reported in 63.6% of studies. Frequent (v infrequent) social media use was associated with increased alcohol consumption (odds ratio 1.48 (95% confidence interval 1.35 to 1.62); n=383 068), drug use (1.28 (1.05 to 1.56); n=117 646), tobacco use (1.85, 1.49 to 2.30; n=424 326), sexual risk behaviours (1.77 (1.48 to 2.12); n=47 280), anti-social behaviour (1.73 (1.44 to 2.06); n=54 993), multiple risk behaviours (1.75 (1.30 to 2.35); n=43 571), and gambling (2.84 (2.04 to 3.97); n=26 537). Exposure to content showcasing health risk behaviours on social media (v no exposure) was associated with increased odds of use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (1.73 (1.34 to 2.23); n=721 322), unhealthy dietary behaviours (2.48 (2.08 to 2.97); n=9892), and alcohol consumption (2.43 (1.25 to 4.71); n=14 731). For alcohol consumption, stronger associations were identified for exposure to user generated content (3.21 (2.37 to 4.33)) versus marketer generated content (2.12 (1.06 to 4.24)). For time spent on social media, use for at least 2 h per day (v <2 h) increased odds of alcohol consumption (2.12 (1.53 to 2.95); n=12 390). GRADE certainty was moderate for unhealthy dietary behaviour, low for alcohol use, and very low for other investigated outcomes.

Conclusions: Social media use is associated with adverse health risk behaviours in young people, but further high quality research is needed to establish causality, understand effects on health inequalities, and determine which aspects of social media are most harmful.

Study registration: PROSPERO, CRD42020179766.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Logic model illustrating the pathways between social media and health risk behaviours in adolescents. Variables considered important potential confounders in this study are indicated in yellow bold and were selected a priori by the researchers' following expert advisory group consultation and identification of variables considered key confounders in the literature. Variables deemed potential effect modifiers for exploration in this study are indicated in bold. SM=social media
Fig 2
Fig 2
PRISMA flow diagram. APA=American Psychological Association.*One study was not included in the synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) as this resulted in counting of study participants twice; we were able to include estimates from this study in meta-analyses stratified by outcome where this issue did not occur
Fig 3
Fig 3
Effect direction plot for studies of the association between social media use and adolescent alcohol use, by social media exposure. Arrow size indicates sample size; arrow colour indicates study risk of bias. Sample size is represented by the size of the arrow, measured on a log scale. Outcome measure is number of outcome measures synthesised within each study. Studies organised by risk of bias grade, study design, and year of publication. Repeat cross-sectional studies, multiple study populations from different countries, and age subsets originating from the same study reported as separate studies. ESP=Spain; FIN=Finland; KOR=South Korea; NOS=assessed via adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale; RCS=repeat cross-sectional study; SM=social media
Fig 4
Fig 4
Forest plots for association between frequency of social media use and A) alcohol use, B) drug use, and C) tobacco use. (A) Binary exposure (frequent or daily v infrequent or non-daily) and binary or continuous alcohol use outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric (N=383 068). (B) Binary exposure (frequent/daily v infrequent/non-daily) and binary or continuous drug use outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric (N=117 645). (C) Binary exposure (frequent v infrequent) and binary or continuous tobacco use outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric (N=424 326). Hard drugs were defined by the cited papers as prescription drugs without a doctor’s prescription (eg, OxyContin), cocaine crack, methamphetamine, ecstasy, heroin, or opioids. CI=confidence interval; ESP=Spain; FIN=Finland; KOR=South Korea; OR=odds ratio; RoB=Risk of bias; SM=social media; SNS=Social networking sites
Fig 5
Fig 5
Forest plots for association between frequency of social media use and A) sexual risk behaviour, B) gambling, C) anti-social behaviour, and D) multiple risk behaviours. (A) Forest plot for binary exposure (frequent/at all v infrequent/not at all) and binary/continuous sexual risk behaviour outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric. N=47 280. (B) Forest plot for binary exposure (frequent/at all v infrequent/not at all) and binary/continuous gambling outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric. N=26 537. (C) Forest plot for binary exposure (frequent/at all v infrequent/not at all) and binary/continuous anti-social behaviour outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric. N=54 993. (D) Forest plot for binary exposure (frequent/at all v infrequent/not at all) and binary/continuous multiple risk behaviours outcome meta-analysis, with OR used as common metric. N=43 571. CI=confidence interval; n=Number of study participants; OR=odds ratio; RoB=Risk of bias; SM=Social media; SNS=Social networking sites

References

    1. Kemp S. Facebook statistics and trends. DataReportal. 2022. https://datareportal.com/essential-facebook-stats [accessed 29 August 2022]
    1. Kemp S. Instagram statistics and trends. DataReportal. 2022. https://datareportal.com/essential-instagram-stats [accessed 29 August 2022]
    1. Gebremeskel RH, Sessoms K, Krehnbrink M, Haney CJ, Coyne-Beasley T. Social media use and adolescent risk taking behavior. J Adolesc Health 2014;54:S46-7. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.10.106. - DOI
    1. Chou WY, Hunt YM, Beckjord EB, Moser RP, Hesse BW. Social media use in the United States: implications for health communication. J Med Internet Res 2009;11:e48. 10.2196/jmir.1249. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aichner T, Grünfelder M, Maurer O, Jegeni D. Twenty-five years of social media: A review of social media applications and definitions from 1994 to 2019. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2021;24:215-22. 10.1089/cyber.2020.0134. - DOI - PMC - PubMed