An umbrella review of 232 meta-analyses concludes that digital health interventions are effective versus inactive controls but generally do not outperform standard therapies across multiple clinical conditions. The analysis spans roughly 559,792 participants and highlights that effect sizes may be modest and underlying evidence quality often varies. The findings matter for health-system and payer decision-making: rather than replacing care, digital tools may be best positioned as adjuncts that improve adherence or engagement in selected settings. The review also underscores the need for stronger trials and consistent endpoints to determine where digital modalities add unique clinical value. For biotech and medtech developers integrating software into care pathways, the message is to prioritize clinically meaningful outcomes and robust comparative study designs.