Background: The deep integration of digital technology is reshaping the health service model in higher education. As digital natives, college students’ digital health literacy directly affects their ability to obtain, evaluate and apply health information. However, there is still a significant gap in the research on the current status and intervention strategies of digital health literacy among this group. Method: This study adopts a mixed-methods approach combining a PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review and empirical data analysis to conduct an in-depth investigation of relevant studies published from 2019 to 2026. A two-round Delphi expert consultation and multiple cross-sectional questionnaire surveys were also implemented to collect original empirical data for quantitative analysis. Result: The analysis revealed that college students’ digital health literacy exhibited significant intergroup differences and structural deficiencies, particularly in information evaluation competence and critical thinking capacity. Digital mental health interventions are feasible and accepted, but they still face many difficulties such as technical access barriers, privacy protection problems and cultural adaptability issues when being carried out. Digital decision support systems-based mental health education intervention has an obvious effect on improving anxiety symptoms. Low burden preventative digital mental health intervention is also possible for freshman to have good feasibility. Conclusion: Enhancing college students’ digital health literacy requires the construction of a multi-level and three-dimensional support system. We can combine educational resources, technical platforms and policy guarantees together for this purpose. Future directions include the development of intelligent and personalized digital health literacy enhancement tools; to set up long-term evaluation mechanisms; and also to carry out digital health literacy education in all stages of talent cultivation in universities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: