Rectal foreign bodies in children are rare. The case report defines a rectal foreign body as an object that enters the colon and rectum through the mouth or anus, becomes impacted and cannot be expelled spontaneously. Foreign bodies in the pediatric gastrointestinal tract are relatively common in pediatric emergency departments, with coins, fruit pits, button batteries, magnets and toy parts ingested orally identified as common examples. The reported case was different in both route and repetition: the child was preschool-aged and reportedly inserted foreign objects into the rectum twice in a single year.

The investigators performed a retrospective analysis of the child’s behavior in daily life and examined several possible mechanisms behind the two episodes. They also reviewed previous research on similar issues among adolescents. From this combination of clinical observation, caregiver reporting and literature review, they proposed a potential relationship between excessive exposure to short-form video applications and the child’s unusual behavior. The case does not demonstrate that short-form video use caused either episode, and the authors described the association only as a hypothesis for further investigation.

Several features of the evidence constrain the conclusion. The report concerns one preschool child, relies partly on retrospective analysis and draws on research involving a different age group for broader interpretation. Problematic short-form video use was reported by caregivers, but the supplied case summary does not quantify the child’s media exposure or provide a controlled comparison that could isolate video habits from other possible explanations. A single case also cannot establish how common the behavior is, identify a mechanism, or test whether parental supervision and media guidance caused the reported improvement. The authors called for larger-scale studies to validate or refute the potential association.

The child’s improvement under parental supervision and guidance was an observed outcome in the case, not evidence that a particular strategy prevented recurrence or that reducing short-form video use was responsible. The authors suggested that clinicians encountering similar preschool-aged patients should pay attention to children’s media-exposure status and use prudent supervision, patient guidance and reasonable media use. Those suggestions remain grounded in a rare, hypothesis-generating case rather than a tested prevention program. Overall, the report offers a noteworthy clinical observation for future research while making clear that a plausible association is not the same as evidence of causation.

Subject of Research: A hypothesis-generating case report on recurrent rectal foreign-body insertion and problematic short-form video use in a preschool child

Article Title: Recurrent rectal foreign-body insertion in a child with caregiver-reported problematic short-form video use: A hypothesis-generating case report

Article References: Wang¹, Y., Zhao, J., Cheng², X., Xue², Y., & Diao², C. (2026). Recurrent rectal foreign-body insertion in a child with caregiver-reported problematic short-form video use: A hypothesis-generating case report. BMC Psychology, 14(1), Article 1399. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-05507-0

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s40359-026-05507-0

Keywords: case report, preschool child, rectal foreign body, short-form video, problematic media use, child behavior, caregiver reports, hypothesis generation, parental supervision, Recurrent, rectal, foreign-body