This systematic review synthesises empirical evidence on digital learning fatigue (DLF) and its psychological consequences among tertiary students in the post-pandemic era. It addresses prevalence patterns, contributing factors, mental health impacts, and moderating variables shaping fatigue experiences across global higher education contexts. Following PRISMA-2020 guidelines, a multi-database search (Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, ERIC, and Google Scholar) identified 2,315 records (January 2020-May 2025). Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria after rigourous screening and quality appraisal using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were narratively and thematically synthesised to integrate quantitative prevalence evidence and qualitative psychosocial insights. Across studies, DLF affected 45-75 % of tertiary students and manifested through intertwined cognitive, emotional, and behavioural symptoms. The most common psychological outcomes were anxiety (68 %), stress (64 %), and depressive symptoms (55 %). Fatigue consistently reduced motivation, concentration, and academic engagement while elevating burnout risk. Gender (higher in females), academic discipline (arts/humanities > STEM), and screen exposure (6-8 h+ per day) amplified fatigue, whereas resilience and adaptive coping moderated adverse effects. Cross-regional variations reflected technological infrastructure and institutional preparedness. The review identifies an urgent need for evidence-based interventions such as balanced asynchronous-synchronous workloads, resilience-building programs, ergonomic design standards, and institutional mental-health support. This is among the first post-pandemic systematic syntheses to conceptualise DLF as a multidimensional psychosocial syndrome rather than a transient technological stressor. By integrating cognitive load, self-determination, and conservation-of-resources perspectives, the review offers an ecological framework for reducing fatigue and promoting sustainable digital learning wellbeing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Okpako et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: