Unveiling The Dark Side Of Influencer Marketing

Research shows that a consumer continuously exposed to the same ad between six and ten times has a 4.5% less likely chance of purchasing the product than a consumer who has only seen the ad two or five times. This is the world of advertisement in which a customer can quickly love an ad and hate it depending on how many times they have seen it. With such unpredictable customer reactions, there has been an incorporation of social media due to the rise of technology to increase the customer base for the different products produced by companies. Attention is now a coveted currency when it comes to advertising, and the rise of influencer marketing has taken over how advertising is conducted, making it easier for companies to attract more customers due to the number of followers an influencer has. However, the continued rise of influencer marketing on social media platforms should be re-evaluated since it has been given so much power by companies eroding consumer choices.

First, the use of influencer marketing results in the manipulation of customers which causes them to indulge in impulse buying activities. The follower base of influencers highly values the opinions and recommendations offered by influencers as they consider them trustworthy and reliable. This can result in more danger to customers if the influencer is not authentic. When influencers are mainly driven by maintaining partnerships, they may prioritize quantity over quality, causing them to promote products without effectively evaluating them, alluring their followers to indulge in impulse buying as they have faith in the influencer’s words. For instance, Koay points out that “Only attractiveness and trustworthiness were found to

have a significant positive influence on online impulse buying” (22). Influencers are known for making products appear aesthetically pleasing to the eye, and through this, it becomes easy to manipulate the customers into buying what they are selling—impulse buying results from focusing on a commodity’s outward appearance rather than its quality. An example of a social media influencer who misled consumers was Brittany Dawn Davis, a health and fitness influencer with over one million followers on Instagram and TikTok, who made consumers spend over $300 for a fitness plan that did not work (Sanders 1-3). This highlights that influencers can manipulate consumers into believing everything they display on the internet, as most of them claim that it has worked for them. Therefore, consumers think that it will be effective for them, too. This kind of misguiding offered by influencers ruins the chance for people to believe in the products sold, even if they are authentic, particularly on social media platforms.

Similarly, research shows that 48% of social media users purchase a product after seeing its recommendation. However, 68% of them regret their choices. This indicates that influencers have a lot of influence on the type of choices that consumers make for themselves when it comes to the products they use, and this can come with enormous repercussions for the consumer who follows the influencer’s recommendations mindlessly. The statistics indicate that most consumers regret their choices, highlighting the angelfish fully trusting influencers to sell products to consumers, particularly if the consumers do not have a code of conduct and care for their followers. Also, the need for positive feedback and continuous engagement can override the influencer’s responsibility towards their followers, who will end up purchasing the products they recommend. Hence, consumers need to learn to trust their judgement regarding the products they choose to use to avoid being manipulated and losing faith in their choices and instincts.

Second, companies are handed negative publicity, which in turn affects their image and their overall performance. Companies have shifted their focus on integrating influencers when it comes to marketing their products, and the selection of influencers who are focused on making profits affects their image when they sell products that are not customer-friendly. When customers discover that influencers only recommend products for financial gain, they will quickly lose trust in both the company and the influencer. According to Singh and Melanie, “Consumers seem to resist crisis response messages reinforced by SMIs, as influencers are perceived to be driven by strategic, profit-seeking motives. Crisis response messages, however, are advantageous if the values-driven motives behind the influencer-brand partnership are actively communicated” (470). This underscores that consumers have learned of the tricks that many influencers use when marketing products to them and choose not to have such an association with them. The ideology that, as consumers, we base our trust on individuals who are only seeking profit is scary, and this affects the ability to have faith in a company that uses influencers for their marketing regardless of their authenticity. The customer base may distance themselves from the company and share such knowledge with those within their reach, affecting the company’s overall image. The loss of trust dramatically affects the company’s entire performance, causing a decline in customer loyalty and sales and damage to its brand reputation.

Furthermore, the authenticity of social media is greatly affected by influencer marketing, particularly when it comes to people relying on the products advertised on these platforms. With the rapid rise in technology, social media platforms have become the new normal advertising channels. Currently, 93% of marketers use social media platforms as an advertising tool, highlighting that many people are easily accessible on these platforms. However, the rise of influencer marketing tampers with this, and there is a skepticism developed due to the products recommended by influencers, given that 50% of millennials trust recommendations offered by influencers. This underscores that most of the population relies on influencers’ recommendations when it comes to product selection, and influencers’ recommendation of forfeit products affects how consumers rely on social media advertisement.

Additionally, when people discover that most of the recommendations are based on financial gain, it will be difficult for people to trust any product recommended on any social media platform. The social platform’s ethics and integrity will be question, affecting companies’ abilityes to use it as a marketing tool. Mariah Wellman states, “Media coverage of influencer marketing abounds with ethical questions about this emerging industry. Much of this coverage assumes influencers operate without an ethical framework and many social media personalities skirt around the edges of legal guidelines” (68). This implies that influencer marketing is not a fully developed industry, which shows that their way of handling matters differs, particularly regarding ethics and the morals they follow. This can cause a lot of skepticism among consumers, particularly those who have regretted following influencer choices and those who have witnessed the adverse outcomes other consumers have experienced due to such recommendations.

A controversial instance is the case of Balenciaga and the rumours about the brand promoting child pornography with their advertising. This affects how consumers view the company and the influencers who continue to endorse such companies as being authentic. It is vital to ensure that social media platforms have restrictions regarding the type of publicity influencers choose to display on their platform to avoid heavily affecting the overall credibility of the platforms when it comes to advertising genuine products to the public.

In conclusion, advertising is one of the most effective ways of creating vast awareness of a product to the public, and the main channel used by most companies is social media. It is important to ensure that the developing industry of influencers has code of ethics that govern how the advertise products and ensure that they prioritize consumer wellness over profitability. Companies must ensure that they associate with credible and reliable influencers while ensuring that their products are authentic and consumer friendly to maintain the customer base and their image. The larger percentage of consumers are people, and therefore, it is important to ensure that no advertisement is done at the cost of people’s well-being.

Works Cited

Koay, Kian Yeik, Chai Wen Teoh, and Patrick CH Soh. “Instagram influencer marketing:

Perceived social media marketing activities and online impulse buying.” First

Monday 26.9 (2021).

Sanders, John. “Influencer False Ad Settlement Shows Small Biz Is Fair Game.” Winston & Strawn, 2023.

Singh, Jaywant, Benedetta Crisafulli, and Melanie Tao Xue. “‘To trust or not to trust’: The

impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in

crisis.” Journal of Business Research 119 (2020): 464-480.

Wellman, Mariah L., et al. “Ethics of Authenticity: Social Media Influencers and the Production

of Sponsored Content.” Journal of Media Ethics, vol. 35, no. 2, Apr. 2020, pp. 68–

  1. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.lbcc.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/23736992.2020.1736078.

Upholding Ethical Standards In Healthcare Research: A Focus On Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Respect, And Justice

Introduction

Research ethics is an essential aspect of scientific research, especially in health care research. The basic concepts of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for individuals, and justice are not empty terms, so this helps researchers design ethically and thoughtfully researched designs when using the participants in research studies. Benevolence derives from the concept that researchers should have to have their ‘plans to do good’; they seek the positive effects and improvements in health and knowledge and minimize the chance of harm. This principle stresses the need to receive the most positive effects for participants and society at large.2 This concept of “not harm,” or nonmaleficence, is complementary to beneficence. So, it stipulates that researchers shall refrain from causing physical, psychological, and emotional harm to the subjects, such that the knowledge search is being done at the expense of the wellbeing of the subject. Respect for persons means that those who participate in research need to be treated as autonomous agents who have the right to be adequately informed about their involvement in a study so that they can make informed decisions. It illustrates the importance of informed consent and respect for individual autonomy and the capacity to make decisions (Tamminen et al., 2021). In addition, justice relates to being fair in research. This involves making sure that research participants fairly share the research burden and benefits. This principle asks researchers to be conscious of biases and to strive for inclusiveness and representativeness in their research. They collectively work like a moral compass for researchers to steer their way through the ethical labyrinth of their profession, where human dignity and welfare should always be placed first in their scientific efforts. This paper aims to deepen these principles further by investigating what researchers can do to adhere to such principles and why such adherence is so important to ensure that research practices become ethical.

Beneficence

Considering healthcare research, the concept of beneficence means that researchers are obliged to ensure favorable outcomes for their patients and contribute positively to their wellbeing (Różyńska, 2021). Steps taken to improve beneficence in research include safeguarding participant welfare each step of the way – from the planning and execution phases to final reporting. For example, researchers should ensure that their designed studies will allow for maximizing the new knowledge acquisition and, at the same time, minimize the risk for participants. The impact of goodwill on patient care improvement has also been demonstrated by case studies in healthcare. For instance, research into new drug therapies is typically performed with the purpose of increasing the effectiveness of treatment and decreasing adverse reactions. These studies, in good faith, attempt to enhance patient wellbeing as far as possible. For instance, clinical trials of new cancer drugs have provided patients with more advanced and focused therapy alternatives that allow for greatly enhanced survival percentages and even quality of life. Another case will be evolving minimally invasive surgery techniques that came from advice on how to establish procedures that reduce the time of patient recovery and postoperative pain. It is, indeed, true that significant advancements such as these are a testament to how valuable practices in research are in bringing tangible benefits to the welfare of patients and how ethical research tends to give immediate returns.

In healthcare research, the problem of harmonizing the struggle for scientific knowledge and balance between subjects’ compartments is intricate. So, to maintain ethical compliance, a comprehensive risk-benefit analysis will be necessary, as it is an inherent part of maintaining this subtle balance. Researchers require a careful evaluation of the potential benefits of the study in questioners – whether the study will contribute to the medical knowledge, improve patient care, or involve new treatment development – in relation to its risk, which may be minor physical discomfort or mental disturbances. This type of evaluation is not an isolated event but a dynamic process throughout the research cycle that should be observed and modified frequently. Often, participants’ risks are equally as high as the possibilities of significant scientific advancement, and the research is fraught with ethical dilemmas. In such situations, researchers are required to engage in extensive ethical thinking – which includes fellow researchers, ethics review boards, and, where possible, the participants themselves. The final objective, therefore, is based on the premise that acquiring knowledge does not have an unacceptable cost on the dignity, rights, and welfare of these research subjects.

Nonmaleficence

The principle of nonmaleficence is based on the idea of “no harm”; that is, researchers need to ensure there is no physical or psychological harm that their participants encounter during their research(Bruno et al., 2022). This means doing appropriate risk assessments and ensuring that the potential benefits of the research are more than the potential harm. For instance, in clinical trials, it might mean choosing non-invasive procedures over invasive ones. Nonmaleficence is a problem because of unexpected risks and ethical dilemmas that the researchers have to face in heavyweight research. Meeting the healthcare research challenges of nonmaleficence demands a multifaceted solution encompassing ethical forecasting, robust risk management, and participant-centered care. This method first identifies and prevents potential harm by going through a comprehensive ethics review. Researchers should conduct in-depth risk assessments and identify and manage physical, psychological, or social risks for participants, from careful protocol design where the least invasive and risky methods are used first. During the lifetime of a study, continuous monitoring is done to ensure that any emerging risks are identified and addressed in a timely manner. Aside from that, involving the participants in the decision-making process and maintaining the communication channels reinforce their cognition and trust, listing this principle among the internal components of research activities together with nonmaleficence.

Transparency is required; researchers should disclose all “what’s” in the study, including the risks, participants, governance institutions, etc. This transparency is not unique to the start of this study. It involves ongoing communication about any new developments or changes that occur in the research. Constant monitoring is another critical factor. Monitoring the process on a regular basis will timely identify risks or adverse events that may occur in the course of research. Standards should be upheld through independent ethics committees or institutional review boards that carry out ethical reviews. These bodies essentially critically analyze the design of the operation of such a study and take ethical considerations into account at every point. They also provide an arena of accountability where researchers must provide a rationale for why they have chosen the methods that they have used and the impact that their work is likely to sharpen. The premise is that transparency of ethics, continuous monitoring, and the rigorousness of the ethical review on behalf of the researchers enables them to go through the complex ethics of their work while prioritizing the health and rights of the participants at each stage of studies.

Respect for Persons

Healthcare research that recognizes persons focuses on the requirement of treating participants as independent agents but safeguarding those with reduced autonomy. Some of the key actions to consider include informed consent, where the participants are given all the information on what this research is all about as well as its benefits and risks before they agree to participate without coercion (Horstkötter & de Wert, 2020). For instance, more protection and consideration are given to such patients as those with cognitive impairments. Nevertheless, the difficulty lies in using informed consent in situations that are complex or emergencies. There is a need for researchers to have a high sense and understanding of ethical principles in their approach to these obstacles that lie in respecting autonomy within healthcare research. Research cannot be ethically conducted without a focus on Autonomy, which is the right of people to make enlightened and voluntary decisions concerning their involvement with a research project. Details about the study, the purpose of the study, and the procedures involved should include relevant information to all participants, and they should be able to comprehend this information clearly enough. This involves accessible, comprehensible communication that corresponds to the comprehension level of the participant.

Autonomy respect demands recognition of the powers of all the individuals involved in the decision-making process. This does not simply refer to initial consent but to respecting their right to leave the study at any time without repercussion (Week 6 – Topic Overview Ethical Approach to Research (1). Pdf). Researchers should take care that consent is continuously informed and voluntary, especially in long-term studies where circumstances or risks may change. Vulnerable populations or individuals with impaired decision-making capacity pose difficulties. In such situations, researchers should do more than the standard to preserve autonomy, either by turning to legally empowered proxies or special consent schemes. Participant autonomy cannot be regarded as a static necessity that requires monitoring once. This is an ongoing process throughout the research, which has led to the fact that researchers remain respectful and adaptive and always adhere to ethics while doing their work.

Justice

In terms of research ethics relating to justice, the principle of fairness in distributing both burdens and benefits applies (Strauss et al., 2021). There shall not be discrimination based on race, socioeconomic status, or gender when choosing and treating the research subjects. This may involve making access to experimental treatment methodologies for a variety of demographics. One of the most severe problems is the possibility of participant selection bias, of which researchers should always be careful not to be aware. Indeed, the question of fairness in healthcare research is an intricate puzzle that can be solved only through careful planning and unshakable commitment. Rigorous monitoring is one of the critical strategies that include the continuous and detailed monitoring of the research process so as to ensure that all the people participating in the research are treated fairly. Oversight of research, particularly in the medical sphere, is a comprehensive concept. The teams from different disciplines – ethicists, nursing staff, statisticians, and advocates for patients add a lot of color and experience. Diversity also has a vital role in spotting and theorizing about the potential bias or discrimination that might not be evident to the homogeneous group. Ethicists and other scientist specialists dealing with moral rules can contribute to the ethical aspects of research. They aid in designing and conducting studies that protect the dignity, rights, and best interests of participants. These teams, naturally, foster transdisciplinary collaboration, which can offer a fully informed appreciation of the implications or import of research for much better, ethically informed decision-making. Thus, the fact of overlooking a multidisciplinary team can be significant for proving the validity and ethics of the research and its compliance with the norms of science.

It is imperative to assess continuously the impact of the research on different groups. An evaluation of such research should also take into account its effect on different demographic groups – including marginalized and disadvantaged communities. Finally, researchers should also be open to changing their approaches as per these evaluations to ensure that justice prevails throughout the study. There is also community engagement. The planning and review sessions should include representatives from all of the participant groups. Such inclusion helps understand the needs and perspectives of different groups at a much deeper level to ensure that the research is relevant and respectful to all who are involved. However, strategies for fairness in health research, regardless of how they are defined or pursued at the bottom, involve a proactive and inclusive effort that unites rigorous oversight with constant evaluation and community engagement to ensure that justice is not just logical but practiced procedure at each point in the investigation.

Conclusion

If research is ethically sound in healthcare, these four principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for persons, and justice serve as a foundation. Preserving the regard of research and protecting the participants’ interests call for obedience to these principles manifested in specific activities. As healthcare research increasingly evolves with the aid of technological innovations and growing knowledge of human health, the significance of ethical frameworks increases. Thus, regardless of how fast scientific discoveries take place, new values are preserved but respected for individuals; beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice are still applied.

These guidelines should be flexible enough for the times in which new ethical dilemmas are constantly raised – for instance, by genetic research, just as much by big data and artificial intelligence. They are constantly re-engineered and designed to address new realities and challenges. This is an ongoing process that ensures that ethical considerations do not fall behind scientific progress and so allows a research environment that is as innovative and deeply committed to protecting the rights and welfare of participants. This broad perspective ensures that health research is conducted responsibly and ethically all over the world; this helps enhance the health of all people while considering the patients, different values, and dignity in different cultures. Therefore, it is clear that ethical guidelines for health care research are not static rules but condition standards that members of the scientific society commit themselves to.

References

Week 6 – Topic Overview -Ensuring Ethical Approach to Research (1). Pdf

Strauss, D. H., White, S. A., & Bierer, B. E. (2021). Justice, diversity, and research ethics review. Science371(6535), 1209-1211. https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.abf2170

Horstkötter, D., & de Wert, G. (2020). Ethical considerations (pp. 145-159). Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-36346-8_10

Bruno, D., Pope-Caldwell, S. M., Haberl, K., Hanus, D., Haun, D., Leisterer-Peoples, S., … & Stengelin, R. (2022). Ethical guidelines for good practice in cross-cultural research. https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_3391449/component/file_3393112/content

Różyńska, J. (2021). Taking the principle of the importance of the human being seriously. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy24(4), 547–562. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11019-021-10043-2

Tamminen, K. A., Bundon, A., Smith, B., McDonough, M. H., Poucher, Z. A., & Atkinson, M. (2021). Considerations for making informed choices about engaging in open qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health13(5), 864–886. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2159676X.2021.1901138

Applying Research Findings To Evidence-Based Practices

Introduction

In the quantitative study, “Smart Wearable Devices in Cardiovascular Care: Where We Are and How to Move Forward,” Bayoumy et al. (2021) conduct a thorough examination of the role of intelligent wearable devices in cardiovascular care, offering insights at the intersection of cardiology, technology, and data science. In Nature Reviews Cardiology, the article maps the current state of affairs. It highlights that a multidisciplinary approach is critical to optimizing wearables’ ability to enhance the monitoring of cardiovascular conditions. Despite some limitations that must be considered due to the dynamic nature of wearable technologies, this article serves as a starting point for clinical practitioners, researchers and policymakers who are interested in implementing sophisticated wearables into their cardiovascular care practices.

Article’s overview

The quantitative study chosen by Bayoumy et al. (2021) thoroughly analyses the function and prospects of intelligent wearable devices within cardiovascular care settings. Published in Nature Reviews Cardiology, the research carefully reviews the current situation, bringing information from cardiology, technology and data science to give an overall viewpoint. The authors discuss the prospects of using wearables for cardiovascular conditions, highlighting that a multidisciplinary approach is vital to optimizing their contribution. By integrating current knowledge, the study provides helpful information on how clinicians, researchers and policymakers can introduce wearable technology in cardiovascular care practices. However, the study points to some limitations, mainly needing access to primary research data, and because wearable technology changes rapidly, its ability to be generalized may need to be improved. Despite these shortcomings, the study provides a baseline for insights into how intelligent wearables shape cardiovascular care.

Strengths of the study

The study by Bayoumy et al. (2021) about intelligent wearable devices in cardiovascular care demonstrates several unique strengths that elevate its validity and significance as research. One notable strength is the extensive literature review conducted in this study, which forms a solid ground for understanding what smart wearables can offer when used to provide cardiovascular care (Hughes et al., 2023). The authors compiled enormous information from cardiology, technology, and data science sources, offering a comprehensive picture. This comprehensive review not only summarizes existing knowledge but also enables the identification of research gaps and opportunities. The strength is the careful choice of evidence so that the study has a solid foundation among current developments. By including insights from various domains, this study becomes a reliable source for clinicians, researchers and policymakers to gain an in-depth perspective on the subject matter.

Another significant strength of the authors is that they adopt a multidisciplinary approach. The combination of views from cardiology, technology and data science is representative of the forward-thinking attitude, which recognizes that advancements in healthcare are achieved through collaboration (Lipshultz et al., 2023). It is an interdisciplinary view that has been very important because cardiovascular care and wearable technologies change so fast. Analyzing multiple perspectives, this study presents the intricacies of adopting wearables in healthcare practices and creates an environment for future partnerships between health practitioners and tech developers. As such, this strength increases the relevance and usefulness of that study since it acknowledges a shared responsibility in realizing smart wearables’ potential.

Moreover, the fact that the authors focus on describing future directions and possible advancements in wearable technology for cardiovascular care is another notable strength. This forward-looking approach is essential because as wearables technology continues to change, it helps retain the usefulness of this study for future reference. The study catalyzes ongoing discussions and investigations by providing strategic insights into possible innovations, which foster an iterative development process concerning technological integration within health care.

Weaknesses

While Bayoumy et al. (2021) research on smart wearable devices in cardiovascular care has presented several strengths, it has challenges. Hence, recognizing these weaknesses is crucial for carefully interpreting the results obtained in this study and addressing possible implications for future research on this issue. One significant limitation is the possibility of publication bias in the literature review. The study is mainly based on published literature, and there could be a bias provided that only positive or novel results are represented. At the same time, negative or inconclusive features are not features (Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020). This bias may compromise the completeness of the literature review, giving an unrealistically optimistic perception of where smart wearables currently stand within cardiovascular care. To address this weakness, the authors could have clearly outlined their search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria and attempts to identify unpublished or negative results. Dwelling on this restriction, researchers can make their literature review more transparent and credible as a basis for their study.

Another limitation is the risk of becoming obsolete due to technological changes. Due to the revolutionary speed of innovation in wearable technology, the devices and platforms examined within this study could soon become outdated (Brophy et al., 2021). This could affect the generalizability and relevance of the findings in time. This was one of the weaknesses that authors could have addressed by including a clear timeline for when their manuscript will be published and, where possible, indicating the latest developments on smart wearables, which are still new in technology. Also, recognizing the temporary nature of technology and suggesting ways to update information in future copies or additional materials might have made this study even more usable in the long term.

In addition, the study needs to adequately analyze possible ethical implications and patients’ opinions concerning the application of intelligent wearables in cardiovascular care. The attention is given mainly to the technical and clinical grounds, but knowledge about ethical consequences, privacy concerns and patient insights are necessary for a holistic assessment of wearable interventions. For this reason, failure to dig into these aspects limits the study’s applicability in real-world clinical settings entirely, where ethical considerations play a huge role in decision-making (Liu & Panagiotakos, 2022).

Proposed changes

A promising way to improve the study by Bayoumy et al. (2021) is to suggest that they polish their methodology to make it more orderly and transparent when doing a literature review. Although the study provides an in-depth overview of intelligent wearable devices for cardiovascular care, incorporating a systematic literature review methodology will significantly enhance the credibility and reliability of its conclusions. This includes a concise description of the search strategy, databases searched, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Such a highly structured strategy not only prevents potential biases but also allows readers to know precisely how evidence has been chosen, strengthening the perceived reliability of the study.

Additionally, this study’s strength is that co, which current technologies and possible future directions can be used by including a dynamic, regularly updated component. Due to the rapid changes in the development of wearable technology, it would also be a good idea for an online resource or appendix that is constantly updated to keep this study relevant and valuable at all times. This approach shows a dedication to providing fresh insights that reflect the dynamism of this field. By implementing this suggestion, the study can be an ongoing and reliable source for clinicians, researchers, or policymakers who want up-to-date knowledge of intelligent wearables in cardiovascular care.

On the other hand, a vital suggestion to deal with possible limitations of this research in light of technology obsolescence is about how to communicate a publication timeline. As soon as it is evident that the study was recently conducted, intelligent wearables have been developing fast. Moreover, to counteract the risk of obsolete becoming on, they could engage in collaborative partnerships with proper stakeholders to establish an ongoing repository for advancements. As a result, this forward-thinking approach ensures that the study will continue to be an invaluable and longstanding source even as technology evolves beyond what can currently be studied (Hughes et al., 2023). By adhering to these recommendations, the study can stay relevant and credible in light of ongoing technological innovations.

Implications of the study to nursing practice

The study by Bayoumy et al. (2021) has several important implications for nursing practice, primarily cardiovascular care. The multi-faceted look at smart wearable devices clarifies the potential for groundbreaking patient monitoring and self-management developments. The results emphasize the relevance of implementing these technologies in nursing, as there is much potential for using them to improve patient outcomes and enable people to take control over their cardiovascular health.

A key implication of intelligent wearables for nursing practice is that these devices may transform patients’ engagement and self-monitoring. Nurses can use these devices to encourage proactive patient participation in cardiovascular care as they become more sophisticated and available for every user. Wearables provide real-time data that healthcare professionals can use to monitor patients remotely, spot anomalies quickly, and intervene if necessary (Anikwe et al., 2022). This supports the trend of patient-centred care whereby an individual is actively involved in managing their health, thus aligning this with a collaborative approach. In addition, the study emphasizes that nursing education and training programs should include information about smart wearables and their implementation in practice.

With time, as these technologies are used for cardiovascular care, nurses need to be well acquainted with their applications and functionalities, including interpreting data. This highlights the continued need for professional development to ensure that nurses keep up with technological advancements and contribute effectively to providing high standards of quality care based on scientific evidence. Although the current research design used in the study, such as a comprehensive narrative review, is effective at incorporating prevailing knowledge from existing evidence, it must be noted that this design is better for creating any new empirical proof. The nursing practice would receive further support when the findings are reinforced with good empirical research. A more comprehensive understanding could be achieved using a mixed-method design that combines the broad perspective offered by narrative review with quantitative data regarding the effectiveness and usability of certain wearables in clinical settings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Bayoumy et al.’s (2021) work regarding intelligent wearable devices in cardiovascular care throws light on the changing paradigm of medical technology. Its strengths include the comprehensive nature of the literature review conducted by authors with an interdisciplinary approach and looking forward instead of backward. However, working on potential publication bias issues, considering technological obsolescence and including ethical aspects may improve its credibility. Methodological recommendations for a systematic literature review methodology, dynamic updates and transparent timelines will strengthen the study’s rigour. The impact on nursing practice highlights the transformative potential of wearables that requires continuous education as part and parcel. Although the study provides a detailed narrative review, adding an empirical touch would enhance its effectiveness in guiding evidence-based nursing interventions and technological integration in cardiovascular care.

References

Anikwe, C. V., Nweke, H. F., Ikegwu, A. C., Egwuonwu, C. A., Onu, F. U., Alo, U. R., & Teh, Y. W. (2022). Mobile and wearable sensors for data-driven health monitoring system: State-of-the-art and prospect. Expert Systems with Applications, 202, 117362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117362.

Bayoumy, K., Gaber, M., Elshafeey, A., Mohammed, O., Dineen, E. H., Marvel, F. A., … & Elshazly, M. B. (2021). Smart wearable devices in cardiovascular care: where we are and how to move forward. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 18(8), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-021-00522-7.

Brophy, K., Davies, S., Olenik, S., Çotur, Y., Ming, D., Van Zalk, N., … & Yetisen, A. K. (2021). The future of wearable technologies. London, UK: Imperial College London:

Hughes, A., Shandhi, M. M. H., Master, H., Dunn, J., & Brittain, E. (2023). Wearable devices in cardiovascular medicine. Circulation Research, 132(5), 652–670. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.122.322389.

Lipshultz, S. E., Adams, M. J., & Barach, P. (2023). Research in Pediatric Cardiology. In Pediatric Cardiology: Fetal, Pediatric, and Adult Congenital Heart Diseases (pp. 1–37). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Liu, F., & Panagiotakos, D. (2022). Real-world data: a brief review of the methods, applications, challenges, and opportunities. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22(1), 287. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01768-6.

Morrison-Smith, S., & Ruiz, J. (2020). Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review. SN Applied Sciences, pp. 2, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2801-5.