Background: Providing understandable information to patients is necessary to achieve the two main aims of the Informed Consent process: respecting and promoting patients’ autonomy and protecting patients from harm. In recent decades, new, primarily digital, technologies have been used to apply and test innovative formats of Informed Consent. We conducted a systematic review to explore the impact of using digital tools for Informed Consent in both clinical care and clinical trials. Understanding, comprehension, satisfaction and participation were compared for digital tools versus the traditional Informed Consent process. Methods: We searched for studies on available electronic databases, including Pubmed, ISI web of science (WoS), and Cochrane. Studies were identified using specific Mesh-terms/keywords. We included studies, published from January 2012 to April 2018, that focused on the use of digital Informed Consent tools for surgery, diagnostic procedures, therapeutic interventions, and clinical research. Digital interventions were defined as interventions that used multimedia or audio-video to provide information to patients. We classified the interventions into 3 different categories: video only, non-interactive multimedia, and interactive multimedia. Results: Our search yielded 1046 publications. After title and abstract screening 182 studies were retained for full-text analysis, of which 38 publications were included. Studies examined interactive multimedia (17/38), non-interactive multimedia (11/38), and videos (10/38), and most (34/38) studies were conducted on adults. Innovations in consent were tested for clinical/surgical procedures (26/38) and RCTs (12/38). For RCTs, 21 outcomes were explored, with a positive effect on at least one of the studied outcomes being observed in 8/12 studies. For clinical/surgical procedures 49 outcomes were explored, and 21/26 studies reported a positive effect on at least one of the studied outcomes. Conclusions: Digital technologies for informed consent were not found to affect negatively any of the outcomes, and overall, interactive multimedia tools seem desirable. Interactive multimedia tools indicated a higher impact than passive videos. Presence of a researcher may potentially enhance efficacy of different outcomes. Studies were heterogeneous in design, making evaluation of impact challenging. Robust study design including standardisation is needed to conclusively assess impact.