Trial reportThe Journal of cardiovascular nursing
The Effect of Peer-Mentor Support for Older Vulnerable Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease-A 24-Week Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peer-Mentor Support for Older, Vulnerable Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease: A Mixed Methods Process-Outcome Evaluation.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Trial
- Reducing dropout rates in cardiac rehabilitation among cardiac patients in a vulnerable situation: systematic development and feasibility testing of the Heart Priority Programme.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- From "Rational Agent" to "Bounded Rationality": A Qualitative Study of Decision-Making Biases in Exercise Behavior Among Post-PCI Patients with Coronary Heart Disease.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe positive effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are well established; however, among older and vulnerable patients, nonattendance and dropout are prevalent problems.
aimThe objective of this study is to explore if a 24-week peer-mentor intervention increases initial and long-term CR attendance. Secondary aims are whether peer-mentor intervention improves lifestyle (diet and physical activity) and psychological outcomes (self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, and quality of life) among older vulnerable patients with ischemic heart disease.
methodsThe study was designed as a 2-arm, single-center, parallel, 24-week, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with follow-up at 12 and 24 weeks. Patients were randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to receive either the peer-mentor intervention (in addition to standard CR) or standard CR along (control arm).
resultsBetween August 2021 and March 2023, 117 older, vulnerable patients were enrolled and randomized (59 randomized to peer-mentor intervention and 58 to usual care). The peer-mentor intervention significantly increased CR attendance. This applies to both initial participation in 1 CR session of physical training or dietary advice (78.0% vs 58.6%; P = .03), and long-term attendance in ≥50% dietary advice sessions (50.8% vs 27.6%; P = .01) and completed ≥50% (64.4% vs 41.4% P = .01) or ≥75% of the physical training sessions (59.3% vs 37.9%; P = .02). The study found no statistically significant effect on secondary outcomes.
conclusionsLow CR attendance is a well-known problem, especially among older, vulnerable patients; however, we tested a low-cost, peer-mentor intervention that significantly increased both initial CR participation and long-term attendance in CR sessions in this group of patients.
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.