Reacción a "Reaction: The risks and benefits of screens for children and young people are small, according to a large review of studies"

Although it would be interesting to know how they have specifically carried out some analyses, for example when calculating publication bias, the study follows all the steps that a rigorous umbrella review should follow and, in fact, it is published in a scientific journal with a high impact in the field of psychology, which in itself indicates the quality of the publication. Some signs of its quality are the search procedure used, which is shown in the flow chart in Figure 1, and the classification of the articles according to their quality based on rigorous criteria developed by the authors of the team and whose data are shown in Table 1.

As the study itself advises, more studies with different samples (e.g. population of different ages) and with specific outcomes (e.g. effect of augmented reality on experimental science learning) are still needed in order to reach conclusive findings that can inform educational or health practice. I think its main novelty, together with the fact that it is the first meta-analysis of meta-analyses on the impact of screens, is to call for caution before the drastic messages that are being launched in various media and social networks.

The limitations are marked by the lack of sufficient quality studies, which the authors themselves highlight.