SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Fit, Female or Fifty-Is Cardiac Rehabilitation "Fit" for Purpose for All? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Meta-Regression.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. 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.
- Skeletal Muscle MicroRNA Patterns in Response to a Single Bout of Exercise in Females: Biomarkers for Subsequent Training Adaptation?Biomolecules · 2023Trial
- A machine learning approach predicts improvement of physical exercise capacity based on pulse wave analysis in coronary artery disease patients.Journal of sport and health science · 2026Article
- Women's Cardiovascular Health and Cardiac Rehabilitation: a Priority-setting Partnership.CJC open · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention promoting risk factor modification following coronary artery disease events but the relative benefits for patient subgroups is not clear. This review synthesizes the available evidence on the effectiveness of modern CR programs and determines outcomes for age, sex and prior level of fitness. Methods: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE were examined for RCT and cohort studies involving exercise prescription or phase II or III CR following Myocardial Infarction (MI), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) and cardiac surgery from January 2010 to February 2021. Outcomes assessed included peakVO Results: The mean age of study participants was 59.5 years and 82.7% were male. Females, younger people and those of average or above cardiorespiratory fitness were substantially under-represented in data and attendance, with 13% of study groups with a mean age <55 years. At entry, 73% were below average for fitness vs. age-matched normative values. Fitness improved across all groups following CR with no evidence of sex or age independently affecting outcomes. Conclusions: Modest improvements in fitness in all groups were shown, but the benefits of CR can be far greater. A modern, innovative approach to CR will likely lead to more substantial benefits. This may require a "Precision Medicine" model which tailors exercise prescription to different populations to ensure all CR participant's needs are met. This will ensure that CR is more flexible and accessible for all.
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.