ArticleScientific reports2025
Prognostic value of the six-minute walk test in patients with cardiovascular disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of an eHealth Cardiac Exercise Rehabilitation Platform for Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Based on the Persuasive Systems Design Model: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Functional Capacity and Exercise Tolerance in Residential Care Home Residents with Treated Arterial Hypertension and Coronary Heart Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Sex Patterns of Statin Therapy and Multicomponent Exercise Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Older Adults with Dyslipidemia: A 24-Month Cohort Study.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Follow-up effects of exercise-based interventions on physical performance in cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Left Atrial Strain Correlation with Functional Capacity and Additional Prognostic Value of Speckle Tracking in Cardiac Amyloidosis: A Prospective, Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a convenient method for evaluating functional capacity in daily living. We evaluated the prognostic value of the 6MWT in patients with cardiovascular disease to predict the incidence of MACE. Patients with prevalent cardiovascular diseases were enrolled in the cardiac rehabilitation registry. 6MWT was measured at baseline, and incidences of all-cause death, coronary intervention, admission due to heart failure, and stroke were monitored. Odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) for MACE were compared, and cutoff distance of 6MWT according to endpoint diseases were calculated for both common and disease-specific thresholds. A total of 1,374 patients were enrolled, with 105 (7.6%) MACE events. The MACE group walked shorter 6MWT distances (329 ± 110 m) compared to controls (396 ± 114 m, p < 0.001). Each 50-meter increase in 6MWT distance was associated with a lower OR (0.78, p < 0.001) and HR (0.83, p < 0.001) for the MACE. Cutoff distance for MACE was 392 m, with sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 53%. The disease-specific cutoffs provided better classification of individual outcomes for all-cause death, coronary intervention, and stroke. The 6MWT has a prognostic value for predicting MACE in patients with prevalent cardiovascular diseases. Different thresholds should be applied for specific diseases to enhance the predictive accuracy.
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.