SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025
Reviews in Educational Psychology (Frontiers in Psychology 2010-2024): typology, topics, regional comparative and methodology toward digital and AI approaches.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a systematic review of reviews published in Frontiers in Psychology (2010-2024) to examine methodological and conceptual advances in educational psychology. The objective is to synthesize research trends over 14 years and explore global challenges, such as the digitalization of education and the integration of emerging technologies. Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in Frontiers in Psychology, Web of Science, and Scopus, identifying 392 reviews. The selection process involved duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text evaluation, applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure methodological rigor. Data extraction and classification were carried out using an Excel-based structured database, analyzing publication years, methodological design, data sources, statistical and qualitative analysis methods, validation approaches, theoretical frameworks, thematic areas, geographical distribution, study limitations, reported results, practical applications and study populations. The methodological analysis highlights the predominance of systematic reviews, the increasing adoption of qualitative and mixed-method approaches, and a growing emphasis on digital tools and artificial intelligence. The study also reveals significant regional disparities in research output, with some regions being notably underrepresented. Beyond identifying trends, this review of reviews illustrates how psychology adapts to contemporary educational challenges through interdisciplinary methodologies and evidence-based strategies. The findings provide valuable insights into the evolving challenges in educational psychology, reinforcing the role of Frontiers in Psychology in driving methodological innovation and scholarly discourse. Furthermore, they contribute to the advancement of inclusive and sustainable educational practices aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Future research should focus on meta-analyses of emerging trends, longitudinal methodological studies, and strategies to address regional imbalances, fostering a more globally representative perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.