🤝🏫 Families, critical thinking, psychosocial skills, environments: guidelines for decision-makers, with the testimony of an establishment.
The file presents itself as a decision-making aid: it provides, in an accessible format, data to support the implementation of health promotion projects (back cover). It brings together on one page the key points for decision-makers (p. 2), definitions of the three forms of disability addressed (p. 3), a benefits-risk table (p. 10), seven levers for intervention (p. 11-13) illustrated by seven examples of projects with their links (p. 14) and the account of an implementation in an establishment (p. 15). The complete bibliography is available online (p. 16).
"
1️⃣ SUMMARY
Published in the D-CoDé Health collection of the Health Promotion Federation, this knowledge file focuses on the problematic use of screens among people with cognitive, mental, or psychological disabilities. It starts from an observation: these people are rarely considered in institutional documents and reference frameworks, and specific data is scarce (p. 4). It reminds us that there is no consensual scientific definition of "abusive" or "excessive" use (p. 4) and that the concept of screen addiction is controversial (p. 2). It presents statistical data (p. 6), health effects (p. 7-8), risk factors and positive effects (p. 9-10), then seven levers and seven examples of intervention (p. 11-14), a testimony (p. 15) and the documentary research method (p. 16). It is aimed at elected officials and decision-makers (p. 2; back cover).
2️⃣ WHAT TO REMEMBER
1️⃣ A poorly equipped field. The file notes that there is little scientific data, resources and intervention tools available for these people, and that the tools require adaptations (p. 2, 12). It specifies that the lack of data does not mean that these people are not affected (p. 4).
2️⃣ Figures from different sources and eras. According to a thesis from 2011, 82% of people with cognitive, mental or psychological disabilities in institutions use screens daily, especially in unregulated use (p. 6). According to a study in ESMS in Nouvelle-Aquitaine (2025), problematic screen use is overwhelmingly the top issue among young people and in third place (21%) among adults, after tobacco and alcohol (p. 6); the document does not specify the measured indicator.
3️⃣ Seven intervention levers, each illustrated by an existing project : training in CPS and EMI, involving families and surroundings, mobilising critical thinking, acting over time, adopting a pedagogical and participative approach, developing self-awareness and body awareness, creating supportive environments (p. 11-14). The development of CPS is presented as an effective global intervention strategy for this audience (p. 11). The projects mentioned do not all specifically target people with disabilities (p. 14).
3️⃣ TO ACT
1️⃣ Address the issue of screens at the Social Life Council and propose coordinated actions with families: charter to regulate screens at home, poster campaign in the establishment, parent café, awareness day on EMI (examples cited p. 12).
Case : suggestion proposed by the document (“can also be addressed ”), in the service of the dialogue it deems “necessary” (p. 12).
2️⃣ Incorporate screen support into the establishment's project. The document indicates that organisational and political changes, led by management, “must be initiated,” for example in this way (p. 13). DIME Europe has done this for five years (p. 15, testimony).
Case : action requested by the document.
3️⃣ Rely on the cited resources : the selective bibliography (bit.ly/ecrans-handicap, p. 16), the seven projects and their links (p. 14), the ‘Physical Format’ kit from Autisme diffusion (p. 13), the Internet Permit and the PIX platform (p. 12). The document reminds us that the issue is to adapt the existing tools to this audience (p. 12).
Case : existing tools cited by the document.
4️⃣ 3 PRACTICAL QUESTIONS
1️⃣ Is it necessary to be a technical expert to address media education ? No. The lever ‘training’ aims to provide professionals with the knowledge to feel legitimate, explaining that it is not necessary to be a technical expert. Organisations offer this training: associations of the Health Promotion Federation, CEMEA, CEFRAS, Canopé network, CLEMI (p. 11).
2️⃣ Is successful learning on screen acquired? No. The document asks to generalise it ‘in an ecological environment’, with everyday life supports: a child who knows how to do a puzzle on a tablet will not necessarily know how to do it in class (p. 13).
3️⃣ What screen time guidelines does the document mention? For children (Commission ‘Children and Screens’): no screens before 3 years, use not recommended until 6 years, then moderate and controlled access, a maximum of 2 hours per day. For adults, international recommendations suggest a recreational exposure time of 3 hours per day (p. 6). These guidelines concern the general population; no specific guideline for people with disabilities has been identified in the document.
5️⃣ TO GO FURTHER
On the blog Health Practices: « Digital accessibility in the service of the quality of learning » (6 October 2026). Concrete guidelines for making digital resources accessible: texts, videos, images. Link verified on 7 October 2026.
External resource : Public Health France, « Growing up with screens », Health in action no. 474, july-september 2026 (published online on 2 October 2026), 44 p. According to the publisher's presentation, the issue focuses on children and adolescents in general and presents actions: support for families, media education, role of local authorities. Disability is not mentioned in this presentation. Link verified on 7 October 2026.
6️⃣ HASHTAGS
#healthpractices #Disability #ScreensAndHealth #ProblematicScreenUse #PsychosocialSkills #MediaEducation #ESMS #HealthPromotion
7️⃣ VIEW ON HEALTH PRACTICES
Analysis Health Practices — these assessments are not attributed to the authors.
⚠️ Accessibility (literacy) : the mastery of reading and writing is cited among the factors that complicate the use of digital technology (p. 9) and the issue of adapting tools to make them accessible is raised (p. 12), without a detailed adaptation method.
✅ Empowerment: lever « pedagogical and participatory approach » — stating the objectives, relying on the experiences and skills of the participants, enhancing their capacity to act (p. 12); strengthening of CPS (p. 11); community health not explicitly addressed.
⚠️ Equity : treated mainly from the perspective of the observation — legal definition of disability (law of 2005, p. 3), more frequent precariousness cited according to a report (p. 9), strengthening of social and territorial health inequalities (diagram, p. 8), stigmatization (p. 13) ; no dedicated action has been identified.
✅ Work in network : dialogue between professionals, families and surroundings, Social Life Council (p. 12) ; solutions built collectively with all stakeholders (p. 13) ; projects carried out in various places — ESMS, PJJ, child protection, colleges (p. 14) ; support from Promotion Santé Pays de la Loire to DIME Europe (p. 15).
Assessment : strong point, concrete levers illustrated by existing projects ; main lack, the participation of the concerned individuals in the design of actions and tools is underdeveloped, beyond the invitation to build with “all stakeholders ” (p. 13).
Reliability : Nearly 150 documents selected by the working group. They come from a collaborative monitoring, from multidisciplinary databases (Bib Bop, PubMed, Cairn, Ascodocpsy), from academic engines, from institutional sites and from open archives HAL and Dumas (p. 16).
To go further, order a research or a documentary monitoring
This article : An editorial production based on
experience enhanced by artificial intelligence - The English version of the site is an automatic translation: the French version prevails - Click on the image 