Over 120 researchers from 11 fields used a Delphi process to evaluate 26 claims about smartphones/social media and adolescent mental health, iterating toward consensus statements. The panel generated 1,400 citations and released extensive supplements showing how experts refined positions. This provides a structured way to separate agreement, uncertainty, and policy‑relevant recommendations in a polarized field.
— A transparent expert‑consensus protocol offers policymakers and schools a common evidentiary baseline, reducing culture‑war noise in decisions on youth tech use.
Steve Stewart-Williams
2026.01.10
70% relevant
The article supplies granular, longitudinal personality data that informs and complicates expert consensus on adolescent harms from technology—showing a developmental dip in traits (conscientiousness, agreeableness) and a sexed neuroticism rise that any Delphi‑style guidance on youth tech or school policy should incorporate as baseline risk and timing information (study: Steinsbekk et al., 805 Norwegian teens measured at 10/12/14/16).
Lakshya Jain
2026.01.09
85% relevant
The article presents new, large‑scale survey evidence about youth loneliness and anxiety that is precisely the kind of empirical input a Delphi‑style expert consensus would use to separate robust harms from hype; it strengthens the case for convening multidisciplinary, evidence‑anchored panels to make policy recommendations on youth tech, schooling and mental‑health services.
2026.01.04
70% relevant
Both the review and later Delphi work share the same project: separate well‑supported findings from hype. Odgers & Jensen highlight heterogeneity, measurement problems, and the need for preregistered, longitudinal and intensive designs — the same methodological priorities the Delphi consensus later formalized.
Josh Zlatkus
2025.12.29
80% relevant
The author highlights screens, phones, and play‑loss as plausible drivers of youth anxiety and ADHD diagnoses — precisely the contested space the Delphi consensus and related meta‑work set out to adjudicate; the post argues for a layered causal account rather than a single‑factor explanation.
BeauHD
2025.12.02
70% relevant
The article presents new cohort evidence that can be incorporated into expert consensus efforts; the ABCD dataset and Pediatrics publication are concrete empirical inputs that help move a polarized field toward evidence‑based consensus on which risks (sleep, mood, obesity) are credibly linked to early smartphone uptake.
Bob Grant
2025.12.01
70% relevant
The article provides an additional data point that complements the structured expert consensus effort: a trial‑style intervention showing short breaks reduce symptoms, which helps move the Delphi’s zones of agreement/uncertainty toward concrete, actionable recommendations for schools and clinicians.
2025.10.07
100% relevant
The preprint 'A Consensus Statement on Potential Negative Impacts of Smartphone and Social Media Use on Adolescent Mental Health' and its 170+ pages of supplemental deliberation materials.
2025.04.02
70% relevant
By urging transparency about uncertainties and prioritizing research that can guide action, the editorial supports expert‑consensus efforts to delineate what’s known, unknown, and policy‑relevant on youth tech harms.
2023.04.25
90% relevant
The article reports that multiple, higher‑quality studies and new datasets are converging on a consistent picture about social media and adolescent mental health — exactly the sort of evidence synthesis and structured expert evaluation the Delphi idea recommends as a way to move policy beyond noisy, partisan claims (NPR cites Twenge’s Generations and recent experimental work).