Site-specific N-glycosylation alterations in serum proteins across subtypes of adolescent depressive disorder.

Cardiac rehabilitation is a key intervention for preventing and improving the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular diseases, with core components including exercise training, risk factor control, and psychosocial support [, ]. Studies have shown that regular participation in cardiac rehabilitation can significantly reduce the recurrence of cardiovascular events and improve exercise capacity and quality of life [–]. However, participation rates remain low in real-world practice, especially after hospital discharge. Limited by factors such as time, geography, healthcare resources, and individual adherence, traditional face-to-face rehabilitation programs face multiple challenges [, ]. In recent years, wearable devices, as an essential component of digital health, have provided new technological pathways for cardiac rehabilitation []. Through sensor technologies, they enable real-time monitoring of physiological parameters such as heart rate, step count, energy expenditure, and activity level, allowing patients to continue rehabilitation training in home and community settings []. Moreover, their intelligent feedback and remote monitoring functions help healthcare professionals dynamically assess rehabilitation outcomes and promote individualized interventions [, ]. However, existing studies show considerable variability in the effectiveness of wearable devices in cardiac rehabilitation—some report significant improvements in adherence and exercise performance, while others reveal poor user experience and even resistance among patients [, ]. User preference and experience are key determinants of the acceptance and long-term use of wearable devices []. Factors such as comfort, interface usability, data security, and psychological acceptance directly influence whether patients continue using these technologies. However, most current research focuses on device performance or short-term outcomes, with a lack of systematic synthesis and cross-study integration of patients’ real experiences. Quantitative studies provide statistical evidence but often overlook subjective perceptions; qualitative studies reveal deeper psychological and behavioral mechanisms but are limited by small sample sizes and restricted generalizability. Therefore, a mixed-methods systematic review integrating quantitative and qualitative evidence can provide a more comprehensive understanding of cardiac rehabilitation patients’ preferences, experiences, and the factors influencing their use of wearable devices.