This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions in promoting psychological resilience among non-clinical adult populations. The review searched five databases and identified 101 studies with a total of 20,010 participants. The primary outcomes were mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. Multilevel meta-analyses were conducted to compare intervention and control groups at post-intervention and follow-up assessments. The results showed small but favorable effects of digital resilience interventions on mental distress (SMD = -0.24), positive mental health (SMD = 0.27), and resilience factors (SMD = 0.31). Effects were more pronounced in middle-aged samples, with older age associated with more beneficial follow-up effects. The intervention effects were comparable to those of face-to-face interventions and demonstrated the potential of digital resilience interventions to prepare for future challenges. However, the risk of bias was moderate to high, and the certainty of evidence was very low. The review highlights the need for high-quality, well-designed studies to further validate the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions and to explore their potential in low-resource settings and across different age groups.This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions in promoting psychological resilience among non-clinical adult populations. The review searched five databases and identified 101 studies with a total of 20,010 participants. The primary outcomes were mental distress, positive mental health, and resilience factors. Multilevel meta-analyses were conducted to compare intervention and control groups at post-intervention and follow-up assessments. The results showed small but favorable effects of digital resilience interventions on mental distress (SMD = -0.24), positive mental health (SMD = 0.27), and resilience factors (SMD = 0.31). Effects were more pronounced in middle-aged samples, with older age associated with more beneficial follow-up effects. The intervention effects were comparable to those of face-to-face interventions and demonstrated the potential of digital resilience interventions to prepare for future challenges. However, the risk of bias was moderate to high, and the certainty of evidence was very low. The review highlights the need for high-quality, well-designed studies to further validate the effectiveness of digital resilience interventions and to explore their potential in low-resource settings and across different age groups.