SynthesisBMC psychology2026
Promoting social and emotional learning in K-12 students through digital-based interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC psychology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital-based interventions that promote students’ social and emotional learning (SEL) development have expanded, but their effectiveness and impact remain debated. This study aimed to estimate effects of digital-based interventions on three SEL outcomes: social emotional skills (SES), affect and attitudes (AA), and prosocial and antisocial behaviors (PB), and to examine moderators, including social impairment status, school level, device type, intervention duration, study design, intervention gamification design features, control condition, reporter type, and setting of the intervention.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched Web of Science, ASSIA, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, and ERIC through August 1, 2025, and IEEE Xplore and ACM Digital Library through January 5, 2026; included experimental and quasi-experimental studies; used random-effects models (Hedges’ g); assessed heterogeneity using Q and I²; and evaluated publication bias using Egger’s test and the trim-and-fill method.
resultsThirty-seven studies (N = 4742) were included. In the primary meta-analysis, digital-based interventions showed positive effects across all three outcomes: SES (SMD = 0.631, 95% CI: 0.461 to 0.800), AA (SMD = 0.267, 95% CI: 0.087 to 0.448), and PB (SMD = 0.285, 95% CI: 0.106 to 0.465). After trim-and-fill, SES (trim-and-fill SMD = 0.369) and PB (trim-and-fill SMD = 0.353) remained significant, whereas AA became non-significant (trim-and-fill SMD = 0.078). In moderator analyses for SES, social impairment status and reporter type were significant. Samples with social impairments benefited more. Effects were largest in clinician reports, followed by parent and self reports (similar magnitude), and smallest in teacher reports. For AA, setting of the intervention was significant (home > controlled research > mixed school-and-home/school). For PB, device type was significant (computer-based > tablet/phone). Other moderators were not significant.
conclusionsDigital-based interventions significantly enhance K–12 students’ SES and modestly improve PB. For AA, the initially significant effect became non-significant after correcting for publication bias (trim-and-fill), indicating limited robustness and warranting cautious interpretation. These effects are moderated by social impairment status, reporter type, device type, and setting of the intervention. Future research should use larger samples and long-term follow-up to study digital-based interventions.
trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD420251069260).
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.