ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2014
The role of cardiac rehabilitation following acute coronary syndromes.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alterations in the Properties of Red Blood Cells in Men with Coronary Artery Diseases after Comprehensive Cardiac Rehabilitation.Cardiology research and practice · 2020Review
- Cardiac rehabilitation improves the blood plasma properties of cardiac patients.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2016Article
- Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Established Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease: New Directions in the Era of Value-Based Healthcare.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing evidence highlights the important role of post-hospitalization care (i.e., secondary prevention) for patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). While secondary prevention therapies are available that improve patient outcomes, receipt of those treatments by patients is suboptimal. Cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention (CR/SP) services are systematic, effective models of care that improve delivery of preventive therapies and patient outcomes after ACS, but unfortunately, patient participation in CR/SP has been suboptimal, due to patient-, provider-, and system-based barriers. Systematic processes, including automatic referral processes, help reduce these barriers and improve CR/SP participation, along with the associated health benefits. Strength of physician endorsement of CR/SP participation is another key step in improving CR/SP participation and patient outcomes following ACS. Accountability measures for CR/SP referral and enrollment, including performance measures and other quality of care methods, may help improve CR/SP delivery. Early evidence suggests that these measures have helped improve referral of eligible patients to CR/SP programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.