ArticleBMC medical education2026
The digital well-being among learners in higher education: a scoping review.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDigitalisation has changed how we learn and share knowledge. The rapid growth of technology has transformed how people interact with themselves, each other, and their environment, impacting their well-being. Despite increasing attention in this area, existing studies often examine related constructs, such as technostress, problematic internet use, or digital addiction, in isolation rather than conceptualising digital well-being as a multidimensional and integrative construct. This review aimed to systematically map the functional elements of digital well-being among higher education learners and their relation with overall well-being outcomes.
methodPrimary literature from January 2018 to October 2023 was collected using the three-phase search strategy according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review guideline. Terms 'digital well being' OR 'digital well-being' OR 'digital wellbeing' AND 'higher education' AND 'learners' were searched from the Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases. In this review, functional elements were conceptualised as both characteristics of the digital environment and the cognitive, behavioural, and emotional processes through which learners engage with these environments. All peer-reviewed articles that describe the effects of digitalisation on the well-being of all learners in higher education institutions were included.
resultsOut of the 348 articles initially identified, 34 were reviewed, covering 10,838 undergraduate and postgraduate students from 23 countries. Among studies that reported age, participants ranged from 17 to 48 years, reflecting variation across study populations. Eight interconnected themes emerged: digital self-regulation, digital self-efficacy, digital intention, digital conduct, digital engagement, digital support, digital resources, and digital safety. Among these, digital self-efficacy is conceptualised as a central enabling component within the proposed framework, shaping learners' ability to engage meaningfully in a digital environment. Poor self-regulation was the most frequently reported source of adverse outcomes, while digital conduct and safety remained underexplored with limited evidence of their direct impact on well-being.
conclusionsDigital well-being appears to be shaped by the interaction of individual capabilities, behavioural patterns, and digital environments. The proposed framework offers a conceptually grounded synthesis that may inform future research, particularly in the development of measurement tools and context-sensitive strategies to support digital well-being in higher education.
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.