This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions in non-clinical adult populations. A total of 101 studies involving 20,010 participants were included, with primary outcomes being mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. The results showed small but favorable effects of digital interventions on all three outcomes, with standardized mean differences (SMD) of -0.24 for mental distress, 0.27 for positive mental health, and 0.31 for resilience factors. These effects were comparable to those of face-to-face interventions and remained stable at follow-up assessments. Moderator analyses revealed that older age was associated with more beneficial effects at follow-up, and effects were smaller for active control groups. The findings suggest that digital resilience interventions have the potential to prepare societies for future disruptions. However, the evidence was of very low certainty due to high risk of bias in most studies. The review also found that digital interventions were comparable in effectiveness to in-person interventions, with similar effects on mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. However, effects were smaller for some outcomes in studies using high-intensity active comparators. Additionally, older participants showed more favorable effects at follow-up assessments, possibly due to greater engagement with digital tools. The study highlights the need for more detailed definitions of resilience-promoting interventions and further research to explore the mechanisms behind the observed effects. It also emphasizes the importance of considering factors such as age, intervention design, and delivery format in future studies. Overall, the review provides preliminary evidence that digital resilience interventions can effectively promote resilience, particularly in non-clinical populations.This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions in non-clinical adult populations. A total of 101 studies involving 20,010 participants were included, with primary outcomes being mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. The results showed small but favorable effects of digital interventions on all three outcomes, with standardized mean differences (SMD) of -0.24 for mental distress, 0.27 for positive mental health, and 0.31 for resilience factors. These effects were comparable to those of face-to-face interventions and remained stable at follow-up assessments. Moderator analyses revealed that older age was associated with more beneficial effects at follow-up, and effects were smaller for active control groups. The findings suggest that digital resilience interventions have the potential to prepare societies for future disruptions. However, the evidence was of very low certainty due to high risk of bias in most studies. The review also found that digital interventions were comparable in effectiveness to in-person interventions, with similar effects on mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. However, effects were smaller for some outcomes in studies using high-intensity active comparators. Additionally, older participants showed more favorable effects at follow-up assessments, possibly due to greater engagement with digital tools. The study highlights the need for more detailed definitions of resilience-promoting interventions and further research to explore the mechanisms behind the observed effects. It also emphasizes the importance of considering factors such as age, intervention design, and delivery format in future studies. Overall, the review provides preliminary evidence that digital resilience interventions can effectively promote resilience, particularly in non-clinical populations.