ArticleJournal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives2025
Mortality and Readmission Outcomes for Intensive and Conventional Cardiac Rehabilitation (MR-OFICR) Study.
Article in Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation programs are offered in two major formats: Conventional Cardiac Rehab (CCR), which is primarily based on exercise interventions, and Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation (ICR), which is a holistic approach including dietary modifications with a plant-based diet and wellness counseling. We performed a retrospective cohort study to compare the CCR and ICR groups for the primary composite outcome of Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) at two years. The MACE outcome was 2-year mortality, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI), and stroke. Secondary outcomes were overall mortality, and number of readmissions. There were 2104 patients included in the statistical analysis with 963 in the CCR group and 1141 in the ICR group. We found that there were no significant differences in MACE events between ICR and CCR (OR = 1.10; 95 % CI = 0.81-1.49; p = 0.55). Readmissions were higher in the ICR group than the CCR group, with 34.1 % vs 28.6 % (p = 0.006), respectively. Additionally, older age was associated with more MACE events (OR = 1.16; 95 % CI = 1.07-1.25; p < 0.001). Overall, our study did not demonstrate a difference in the composite MACE outcome between ICR and CCR.
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.