Doomscrolling, mental health, and psychological well-being in adolescents and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Doomscrolling is persistent or repetitive engagement with predominantly negative, threatening, or distressing online information, often accompanied by difficulty disengaging. It overlaps with, but is not interchangeable with, problematic social media use, general negative-news exposure, or broader problematic internet use. We synthesized associations between doomscrolling and mental-health or psychological well-being outcomes. Methods This PROSPERO-registered systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD420261395295) followed PRISMA 2020. Searches covered nine bibliographic, registry, grey-literature, and citation sources through 20 May 2026. Article- or supplement-reported zero-order Pearson or Spearman correlations were synthesized using Fisher’s z transformation and random-effects models with restricted maximum likelihood estimation and Hartung–Knapp adjustment. Adjusted regression or path coefficients and duplicated same-sample scale versions were not pooled. Design-appropriate JBI checklists and GRADE were used for critical appraisal and certainty assessment. Results Forty-four reports representing 44 unique studies were included. Twenty-one studies (23 independent analytic samples) contributed 40 effects to the five primary meta-analyses; the remaining 23 reports contributed narrative or nonprimary quantitative evidence. Doomscrolling was associated with anxiety ( r = 0.35, 95% CI 0.27–0.43), depression ( r = 0.35, 95% CI 0.16–0.52), psychological distress ( r = 0.51, 95% CI 0.37–0.62), lower psychological well-being ( r = −0.29, 95% CI − 0.38 to −0.20), and lower life satisfaction ( r = −0.25, 95% CI − 0.37 to −0.13). Heterogeneity was high in every domain; for psychological distress, I 2 was 86.5% and four of five contributing studies were from Türkiye. Certainty was very low for all five outcomes. Conclusion Doomscrolling is associated with poorer mental-health and well-being outcomes, but the evidence does not establish causality. Cross-sectional designs, high heterogeneity, residual confounding, and geographic concentration limit inference. Standardized measurement, longitudinal and ecological momentary assessment studies, experiments, and preregistered cross-cultural research are needed. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261395295 , identifier PROSPERO (CRD420261395295).