In higher education, concept mapping has been extensively adopted as an assessment and evaluation tool for conceptual knowledge. In recent years, an increasing number of researchers have applied concept mapping to teaching in technology-based environments. However, no research was found to holistically explore the role of concept maps in technological contexts of higher education, or their influences on different learning aspects. To address this gap, the present study referred to the technology-based learning model to conduct a systematic review of the dimensions of the research trends, features (including data analysis, participants, media of concept maps, application domains, and roles of concept maps), and research foci. Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses procedure, this study reviewed the Social Sciences Citation Index articles published in technology-based learning and higher education journals by the end of 2021 from the Web of Science database. The results indicated that in studies on the use of concept maps in technological contexts in higher education (CMHE), the most productive countries/regions (of the first authors) were Taiwan and the United States. The most frequently adopted data analysis methods were quantitative analysis and mixed. In the aspect of application domains, Engineering (including Computer courses) was the most frequent subject for CMHE studies, followed by Language, Social Studies, and Health, Medical and Physical Education. Desk-top computers were the most frequently adopted medium for working on concept maps, although there was increasing adoption of mobile devices. The role of concept maps was mainly as a personal mindtool and assessment and evaluation tool, followed by a collaborative mindtool. In terms of research foci, the cognition dimension was explored the most in CMHE studies, followed by the affect dimension, and learning behavior. Based on the findings of this study, several recommendations are made as a reference for educators, researchers, and policy makers in higher education.