ArticleJAMA network open2020
Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation With Survival Among US Veterans.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of a 15-Week Whole Foods, Plant-Based Diet, Physical Activity, and Stress Management Intervention on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in a Population of US Veterans: A Retrospective Analysis.American journal of lifestyle medicine · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular Care in Women Veterans: An Updated Profile.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Cardiac Rehabilitation Among Veterans: A Narrative Review.Journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and prevention · 2025Review
- Drive Time and Receipt of Guideline-Recommended Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment.JAMA network open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Participation in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs at Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities is low. Most veterans receive CR through purchased care at non-VA programs. However, limited literature exists on the comparison of outcomes between VA and non-VA CR programs. Objective: To compare 1-year mortality and 1-year readmission rates for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization between VA vs non-VA CR participants. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 7320 patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization at the VA between 2010 and 2014 who did not die within 30 days of discharge and who participated in 2 or more CR sessions after discharge. The study excluded individuals hospitalized for ischemic heart disease after December 2014 when the VA Choice Act changed referral criteria for non-VA care. Data analysis was performed from November 2019 to January 2020. Exposures: Participation in 2 or more CR sessions within 12 months of discharge at a VA or non-VA facility. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year readmission rates for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization from date of discharge were compared between VA vs non-VA CR participants using Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability treatment weighting. Results: The 7320 veterans with ischemic heart disease who participated in CR programs had a mean (SD) age of 65.13 (8.17) years and were predominantly white (6005 patients [82.0%]), non-Hispanic (6642 patients [91.0%]), and male (7191 patients [98.2%]). Among these 7320 veterans, 2921 (39.9%) attended a VA facility, and 4399 (60.1%) attended a non-VA CR facility. Black and Hispanic veterans were more likely to attend CR programs at VA facilities (509 patients [17.4%] and 378 patients [12.9%], respectively), whereas white veterans were more likely to attend CR programs at non-VA facilities (3759 patients [85.5%]). After inverse probability treatment weighting, rates of 1-year mortality were 1.7% among VA CR participants vs 1.3% among non-VA CR participants (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.90-1.94; P = .15). Rates of readmission for myocardial infarction or revascularization during the 12 months after discharge were 4.9% among VA CR participants vs 4.4% among non-VA CR participants (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.35; P = .62). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that rates of 1-year mortality and 1-year readmission for myocardial infarction or revascularization did not differ for participants in VA vs non-VA cardiac rehabilitation programs. Eligible patients with ischemic heart disease should participate in CR programs regardless of where they are provided.
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.