ReviewGlobal heart2025
Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease-Challenges, Inequalities, and Opportunities for Global Health.
Review in Global heart, 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.
- Comparison of mHealth-supported and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in patients with stable coronary heart disease: a randomized controlled trial.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Trial
- Successful Management of Chest Pain Through Cardiac Autonomic Rehabilitation.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Multitarget mechanisms and clinical integration of traditional Chinese medicine in cardiac rehabilitation: a narrative review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
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
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a cornerstone of secondary prevention in coronary heart disease, supported by robust evidence and classified as a Class I recommendation in international guidelines. Despite its proven benefits in reducing morbidity, mortality, and improving quality of life, CR remains strikingly underutilized worldwide, revealing a paradox of high-level evidence with low-level implementation. The INTERASPIRE study highlights this global gap, showing that many patients are neither referred nor adhere to CR programs, and that profound inequities persist across regions and socioeconomic groups. These findings underscore systemic failures in translating guideline recommendations into practice, driven not only by structural limitations but also by physician referral patterns, patient awareness, and health system priorities. Addressing this gap requires investment in infrastructure, equitable referral strategies, standardization of program content, and innovative delivery models such as telehealth. Ensuring universal access to CR is both a clinical imperative and a matter of health equity, with the potential to transform outcomes for patients with cardiovascular disease worldwide.
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.