ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Part 2-Cardiac Rehabilitation After an Acute Myocardial Infarction: Timing and Gender Differences in Adherence; Where Do We Stand?
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. 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.
- Early Post-STEMI Cardiac Rehabilitation in the CSC-Infarct Program: Real-World Safety and Effectiveness of Individualized Training Protocols.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- [Pharmacological adherence and cardiometabolic goals in successfully reperfused acute myocardial infarction].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Observational
- Exploring Barriers to Physical Activity Among Jordanian Patients Suffering From Coronary Heart Disease: A Qualitative Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
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 is a beneficial multidisciplinary interventional protocol that improves cardiovascular health and reduces mortality and morbidity rates in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Multiple studies have demonstrated that the implementation of such protocols in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) dramatically improved patients' outcome. It is unfortunate that in practice, in spite of the advantages of cardiac rehabilitation, this approach is seldom employed. Indeed, only some guidance, such as American College of Cardiology and European Society of Cardiology guidelines, recommends cardiac rehabilitation in their protocols. In particular, the European guideline recommends its early implementation while the patient is still in hospital, whereas the American guideline suggests that it should be approximately three weeks after discharge. In Part 1 of this two-part comprehensive review, we provided a historical overview of cardiac rehabilitation, a detailed examination of each component of the cardiac rehabilitation programme, and its impact on cardiovascular health. In Part 2, the objective was to provide a comprehensive explanation of the optimal timing for the commencement of the cardiac rehabilitation programme, and to elucidate the factors that influence low engagement in such programmes, as well as the gender-based differences in adherence.
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.