Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30364405›Full record

ArticleOpen heart

Web-based cardiac

Linzy Houchen-Wolloff, Nikki Gardiner, Reena Devi, Noelle Robertson, Kate Jolly, Tom Marshall, Gill Furze, Patrick Doherty, Ala Szczepura, John Powell and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Open heart. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Prehabilitation.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2019
    Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Linzy Houchen-WolloffCentre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Science (CERS), NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC)- Respiratory, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4940-8835
Nikki GardinerCentre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Science (CERS), NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC)- Respiratory, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Reena DeviFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Noelle RobertsonDepartment of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Kate JollyInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Tom MarshallInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Gill FurzeFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
Patrick DohertyHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Ala SzczepuraCentre for Technology Enabled Health Research, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
John PowellMedical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sally SinghCentre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Science (CERS), NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC)- Respiratory, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Coventry University · GBUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Leicester · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-1013-32059Department of Health PDA/02/06/096
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is typically delivered in hospital-based classes and is recommended to help people reduce their risk of further cardiac events. However, many eligible people are not completing the programme. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of delivering a web-based CR intervention for those who decline/drop out from usual CR. Intervention: A web-based CR programme for 6 months, facilitated with remote support. Methods: Two-centre, randomised controlled feasibility trial. Patients were randomly allocated to web-based CR/usual care for 6 months. Data were collected to inform the design of a larger study: recruitment rates, quality of life (MacNew), exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test) and mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Feasibility of health utility collection was also evaluated. Results: 60 patients were randomised (90% male, mean age 62±9 years, 26% of those eligible). 82% completed all three assessment visits. 78% of the web group completed the programme. Quality of life improved in the web group by a clinically meaningful amount (0.5±1.1 units vs 0.2±0.7 units: control). Exercise capacity improved in both groups but mood did not change in either group. It was feasible to collect health utility data. Conclusions: It was feasible to recruit and retention to the end of the study was good. The web group reported important improvements in quality of life. This intervention has the opportunity to increase access to CR for patients who would otherwise not attend. Promising outcomes and recruitment suggest feasibility for a full-scale trial. Trial registration number: 10726798.

Indexed as

cardiac rehabilitationdelivery of careeducation

Identifiers

PMID30364405
PMCPMC6196944
OpenAlexW2897327658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.