Background: Obesity is a large contributor to preventable chronic diseases and healthcare costs. The efficacy of wearable devices for weight management has been researched, however, there is limited knowledge on how these devices are perceived by users. Objective: To review user perspectives on wearable technology for weight management in overweight and obese people. Methods: We searched the online databases Pubmed, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane library for literature published from 2008 onwards. We included all types of studies using a wearable device for delivering weight-loss interventions in overweight or obese adults when qualitative data were collected about participant’s perspectives on the device. We performed a quality assessment using criteria relevant to different study types. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for randomized controlled trials. The Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies – of Interventions (ROBINS-I) was used for non-randomised studies. The Oxman and Guyatt Criteria was used for systematic reviews. We used the Critical appraisal checklist for qualitative studies. Data were extracted into a data extraction sheet and thematically analyzed. Results: We included 19 studies: 5 randomized controlled trials, 6 non-randomised studies, 5 qualitative studies, and 3 reviews. Mixed perceptions existed for different constructs of wearable technologies, which reflects on differences in the suitability of wearable technology interventions for different individuals in different contexts. This also indicates that interventions were not often tailored to participant’s motivations. In addition, very few wearable technology interventions included a thorough qualitative analysis of the participant’s view on important features of the intervention that made it successful. Conclusions: This study highlighted the importance of determining the type of intervention most suitable for an individual before the intervention is used. This could help participants to find a suitable intervention most effective to them. Further research needs to develop a user-centered tool for obtaining comprehensive user feedback.