Highlights in child mental health research: May 2025

This month’s highlights include:

Systematic review of digital technology use and wellbeing in young children

This systematic review examined the psychosocial wellbeing outcomes of digital technology on young children (aged 4–6). The review found screen time consistently had a small but negative effect on child psychosocial wellbeing indicators and some forms of behaviour. However, studies that measured factors beyond time spent on digital technology (e.g. the digital content and social context) showed mixed results with regard to digital technology use and on child psychosocial wellbeing.

The effects of social media on the mental health of Australian adolescents

This study used data from the Child to Adult Transition Study (CATS) to estimate the impact of social media use on future mental health problems in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years. The study found that the overall effect of social media use on adolescent mental health is small, but younger female adolescents are more vulnerable to its risks.

Building resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander school children

This systematic review used the social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) framework to synthesise information from 13 peer-reviewed papers on factors influencing resilience in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations. The study identified 51 factors that helped 3,700 school-age Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children to be resilient. Most of these factors were related to culture, community and environment. At the individual level, resilience was linked to confidence, self-esteem and self-regulation. At the interpersonal level, resilience involved supportive caregivers, friends and role models, while community-level factors included access to basic needs, education and cultural pride. Suggested programs to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people should consider culture, community and environmental influences, and take a holistic, culturally respectful approach rather than focusing solely on personal traits such as self-esteem.

Supporting young children’s social-emotional wellbeing through early education

This study investigated how Australian early childhood education and care (ECEC) professionals view their role in supporting young children’s social-emotional wellbeing in early learning settings. The authors conducted online focus groups with 20 members of the Australian Research Network of Early Childhood Professionals. The study found that the wellbeing needs of children are increasingly complex. ECEC professionals expressed concerns that the increasing demands of their role, and the complex needs of the children in their care, were negatively affecting their own wellbeing. They also often lacked the training needed to properly support children who had experienced high levels of trauma. Suggested strategies to support children’s wellbeing in early learning settings included inclusive daily practices; empowering children to talk about their wellbeing needs; staff training and mentoring; prioritising continuity of care; and supportive partnerships between professionals, children and families.

Why is this important?

• As digital technology becomes more integrated into young children’s lives, it is crucial to understand its impact on their mental health and wellbeing. This is especially important for younger children, whose brains are rapidly developing, because we do not have a clear picture of how digital devices impact developing brains.
• Previous research on the effects of digital technology use on young children’s wellbeing has been inconclusive. Most studies focus on the amount of time spent using digital technology, rather than considering the effects of different device types or different psychosocial wellbeing factors.

What did they do?

• The authors systematically searched eight databases for studies (published between 2011–2024) on how digital technology use impacts the psychosocial wellbeing of young children (aged 4–6).
• They reviewed 51 research papers and narratively analysed results for over 83,000 young children.
• The review included studies from 29 countries. 84% of studies presented cross-sectional data and 16% were longitudinal.
• The study included research that quantitatively measured how much children use digital technology (e.g. screentime, content, context, or specific devices such as tablets, smartphones, computers, TV and gaming) and looked at indicators of their psychosocial wellbeing (such as mood, behavioural issues, social interactions and the quality of the parent–child relationship).

What did they find?

• Digital technology use, such as screen time and device use, had small but consistently negative effects on young children’s psychosocial wellbeing, behaviour and social functioning. Device use was associated with negative effects on most areas of mental health and behaviour except for social skills.
• Studies examining factors beyond time usage (e.g. digital content and the social context) showed mixed results with regard to how digital technologies influenced child psychosocial wellbeing.
• While much of the research focused on children’s behavioural issues and social functioning, there was less attention on their overall psychosocial wellbeing, parent–child relationships or affect.

What does this mean for practice?

• The results suggest that limiting screen time is beneficial for children. However, we need more research into the impacts of different ways of using technology, and of different family situations, to understand how these might affect child outcomes.

Why is this important?

• There is ongoing debate and policy discussion about social media use, but scientific evidence on its effects on adolescent mental health and wellbeing is limited.
• Research has found weak or inconsistent links between social media use and mental health issues like depression and poor life satisfaction. These are mostly based on cross-sectional studies that can’t establish causation (e.g. whether poor mental health is the result of social media use).
• There is little long-term research on the role of sex or age in how or whether social media affects adolescents. It is still unclear if certain ages are more vulnerable to the negative effects of social media use.

What did they do?

• This study used data from the Child to Adult Transition Study (CATS) to explore how social media use might affect the future mental health of adolescents aged 12 to 18.
• The authors looked at ‘risk differences’, which means comparing how likely mental health problems are for adolescents who use social media a lot to those who don’t use it. This helped the researchers estimate how many adolescents could be affected if new policies were introduced to limit social media use.
• Participants were recruited to the CATS study from Melbourne schools, starting with Grade 3 students (N=1,239) in 2012 (ages 8–9).
• The study focused on self-reported daily social media use and its effects on depressive symptoms, anxiety, wellbeing and self-harm (ages 13–19).

What did they find?

• The study found that the overall effect of social media use on adolescent mental health is small, but younger female adolescents are more vulnerable to its risks.
• Higher levels of social media use were linked to small increases in the future risk of high depressive symptoms across adolescence, with more than two hours of daily use associated with a higher risk, especially in females.
• For adolescents using social media for over two hours daily, the risk of high depressive symptoms, one year after this reported pattern of social media use, was greater for females than males.
• For females, the risk of all mental health problems was higher after social media use in early adolescence (12–13 years) compared to later ages, while no such age differences were seen in males.
• Females were more likely to have poor wellbeing in early adolescence compared to males. The differences in anxiety and self-harm between females who used social media and those who didn’t were small throughout the teenage years. But the biggest mental health risks for females happened in early adolescence – even for those who only used social media for one to two hours a day.

What does this mean for practice?

• Practitioners should be aware that younger female adolescents (12–13 years) are more vulnerable to mental health risks from social media use. This age group is in a critical developmental period where the potential adverse effects of social media use are heightened.

Why is this important?

• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people face complex mental health issues and poorer health outcomes than non-Indigenous Australians due to ongoing effects of colonialism and systemic racism.
• Resilience in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children is commonly rooted in their culture, community and environment, but these links are not well explored in research.

What did they do?

• The systematic review used the social and emotional wellbeing (SEWB) framework. This is a holistic tool for understanding health and wellbeing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations. It recognises the importance of cultural diversity and connections that shape individual and community wellbeing and resilience.
• The reviewers examined what helped 3,682 school-aged Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people (aged 7–19) across five Australian states and territories to be resilient. They studied how resilience is defined and measured, and how it varies depending on age and where the children live.
• The authors analysed 13 articles published between 2008 and 2022 (three qualitative and 10 quantitative) identified through database searches and references.

What did they find?

• Studies defined resilience in different ways, which means they didn’t agree on what it is or where it comes from. Some articles saw it as a result or an outcome, one as a process, and others as something that is built by social or environmental influences.
• The study identified 51 factors linked to resilience for school-age Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children across individual, interpersonal, and community levels.
• The factors were categorised into SEWB domains: connection to body (two factors), connection mind and emotions (15 factors), connection to family and kinship (five factors), connection to community (nine factors), connection to culture (eight factors), connection to country (two factors), connection to spirituality and ancestors (three factors), and social determinants (seven factors).
• At the individual level, resilience was linked to confidence, self-esteem and self-regulation. Interpersonal factors involved supportive caregivers, friends and role models, while community-level factors included access to basic needs, education and cultural pride.
• Mapping these factors to SEWB domains highlighted the importance of considering culture, community and environmental factors in resilience-focused programs.

What does this mean for practice?

• Understanding what helps Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in Australia stay resilient can guide support programs that meet their specific needs. These programs should consider culture, community and environmental influences, and take a holistic, culturally respectful approach rather than focusing solely on personal traits such as self-esteem.
• Professionals working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children can use the SEWB framework to design resilience programs. This framework emphasises how important cultural and social connections are for helping young people stay resilient and promote their wellbeing.

Why is this important?

• Early childhood is critical for children’s development and sets the stage for their future learning, wellbeing and relationships.
• The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened existing challenges, especially for vulnerable families, highlighting the need for early years support to reduce future mental health issues.
• Australian early childhood education and care (ECEC) professionals are ideally placed to monitor young children’s wellbeing and inform interventions and support.

What did they do?

• This study investigated how ECEC professionals view their role in supporting young children’s social-emotional wellbeing in early learning settings.
• The authors conducted six online focus groups (1.5 hours each, in July/August 2022) that included 20 members of the Australian Research Network of Early Childhood Professionals. Of these, 18 professionals lived in Victoria, one was from Queensland and one from New South Wales. They mostly worked in managerial or teaching roles in long day care centres or kindergartens/preschools.
• The discussion questions focused on what child wellbeing means to the practitioners; the key issues impacting child wellbeing in their setting; and what currently works well and where there is room for growth in supporting child wellbeing.

What did they find?

• Key themes from the discussions included:
  • an escalation in child and educator wellbeing needs
  • discrepancies in educator experience and skills
  • the need for access to high-quality professional development
  • the need to prioritise relationships and continuity of care
  • the need to nurture children’s agency, identity and belonging.
• The wellbeing needs of children are increasingly complex, with many children affected by domestic violence, under custody orders or in out-of-home care. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation measures (e.g. home isolation) also had a negative impact on the wellbeing of many children, including those in younger age groups (0–9 years).
• ECEC professionals expressed concerns that the increasing demands of their role, and the complex needs of the children in their care, could negatively affect their own wellbeing. ECEC professionals also suggested that they often lacked the training to adequately support children who had experienced high levels of trauma.
• Suggested strategies to support children’s wellbeing in early learning settings included inclusive daily practices; empowering children to talk about their wellbeing needs; staff training and mentoring; prioritising continuity of care; and supportive partnerships between professionals, children and families.

What does this mean for practice?

• ECEC professionals need support to help foster the inclusion of children’s voices and to create supportive partnerships with families. They also need professional training to better support the increasingly complex needs of the children in their care.