ArticleHeart rhythm O22024
Integrating the quantitative with the qualitative: findings from a mixed methods cardiac rehabilitation exercise trial.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiac rehabilitation is a core component of cardiovascular disease management. Eastern Corridor Medical Engineering-Cardiac Rehabilitation is a digital health platform for online cardiac rehabilitation exercise. We conducted a mixed methods pilot trial to evaluate Eastern Corridor Medical Engineering-Cardiac Rehabilitation. Objective: The study sought to examine the difference between objectively measured outcomes and participant perceptions of benefits and improvements gained from participation in a cardiac rehabilitation exercise program. Methods: Seventeen participants (14 male, 3 female; 69.5 ± 7.3 years of age) took part and were allocated to 1 of 2 groups; an online exercise group (n = 8), or an in-person exercise (n = 9) group. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a pragmatic approach to group allocation was adopted. Objective outcomes were assessed at baseline and repeated following the intervention period, with the primary outcome being 6-minute walk test distance. In addition to clinical outcome measurements, we undertook qualitative interviews with participants. Results: Only 5 participants demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in 6-minute walk test distance, following the 8-week exercise program. The main theme emerging from the qualitative interviews was the valued benefits of the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program. Despite the lack of measurable physical change, participants self-defined a range of benefits they valued and attributed directly to participation in the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program. Conclusion: The findings from this study may offer a useful starting point for further study of community-based cardiac rehabilitation exercise and also highlight the benefit of adopting a mixed methods approach that considers both the objective outcomes measured as well as the subjective reports obtained from participants.
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.