ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2021
Comparison of cardiac rehabilitation (exercise + education), exercise only, and usual care for patients with coronary artery disease: A non-randomized retrospective analysis.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Exercise type and settings, quality of life, and mental health in coronary artery disease: a network meta-analysis.European heart journal · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of exercise training on left ventricular systolic and diastolic function after myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Walking for Health: Franz Tappeiner (1816-1902), Meran, and the Origins of Public Health-Oriented Physical Activity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Initial participant perspectives about participating in an online, semi-supervised, cirrhosis-specific nutrition and exercise intervention.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
- Review
- A scale for measuring home-based cardiac rehabilitation exercise adherence: a development and validation study.BMC nursing · 2023Article
- Current role and future perspectives of cardiac rehabilitation in coronary heart disease.World journal of cardiology · 2021Review
- Comparison of cardiac rehabilitation (exercise + education), exercise only, and usual care for patients with coronary artery disease: A non-randomized retrospective analysis.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation program is well-established but the Rehabilitation After Myocardial Infarction Trial (RAMIT) is reported that it does not affect mortality and morbidity of patients after myocardial infarction during follow-up period. The objectives of the study were to compare functional walking capacity, risk factor control, and morbidities in follow-up for cardiac rehabilitation (exercise + education), exercise only, and usual care among patients with coronary artery disease. A total of 492 male and female patients (age range: 45-73 years) with coronary artery disease after myocardial infarction or underwent percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting surgeries referred to cardiac rehabilitation were included in the study. Patients were participating in a cardiac rehabilitation program (exercise + education, CRP cohort, n = 125), exercise only (USC cohort, n = 182), or usual care (NCR cohort, n = 185). Data regarding incremental shuttle walk test, lipid profile, the Patient Health Questionnaire 9, and morbidities in follow-up of patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed. After completion of 1 year, cardiac rehabilitation program (p < 0.0001, q = 20.939) and exercise (p < 0.0001, q = 6.059) were successfully increased incremental shuttle walk test. After completion of 1 year, cardiac rehabilitation program reduced low-density lipoprotein (p = 0.007, q = 3.349) and depressive symptoms (p < 0.0001, q = 5.649). Morbidities were reported fewer in the patients of CRP cohort than those of USC (p = 0.003, q = 3.427) and NCR (p = 0.003, q = 4.822) cohorts after completion of 1 year of program. Cardiac rehabilitation program (exercise +education) improved functional walking capacity, controlled risk factors, and reduced morbidities of patients with coronary artery disease than exercise only and usual care (Level of evidence: III).
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.