Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34269894›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2021

Cardiac Rehabilitation: Under-Utilized Globally.

Sherry L Grace, Kornelia Kotseva, Mary A Whooley

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. New Insights into Cardiac Intensive Care.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

3 authors.

Sherry L GraceFaculty of Health, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Canada. sgrace@yorku.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7063-3610
Kornelia KotsevaNational Institute for Prevention and Cardiovascular Health, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Mary A WhooleyUS Department of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewCardiac rehabilitation (CR) is grossly under-utilized. This review summarizes current knowledge about degree of CR utilization, reasons for under-utilization, and strategies to increase use. RECENT

findingsICCPR's global CR audit quantified for the first time the number of additional CR spots needed per year to treat indicated patients, so there are programs they may use. The first randomized trial of automatic/systematic CR referral has shown it results in significantly greater patient completion. Moreover, the recent update of the Cochrane review on interventions to increase use has provided unequivocal evidence on the significant impact of clinician CR encouragement at the bedside; a course is now available to train clinicians. The USA is leading the way in implementing automatic referral with inpatient-clinician CR discussions. Suggestions to triage patients based on risk to less resource-intensive, unsupervised program models could simultaneously expand capacity and support patient adherence.

Indexed as

Cardiac RehabilitationHumansInpatientsPatient ComplianceReferral and ConsultationAccess to health careCardiac rehabilitationCardiovascular diseasesHealth care utilizationReferralSecondary disease prevention

Identifiers

PMID34269894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.