SynthesisAnatolian journal of cardiology2025
The Impact of Nurse-Led Cardiac Rehabilitation on Physiological Risk Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of Kinesiophobia, Upper Limb Function, and Grip Strength in Patients with Pacemakers and Coronary Artery Disease.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNurse-led cardiac rehabilitation (NLCR) is a patient-centered approach for managing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, but its physiological effects are unclear. This study evaluates NLCR's impact on key physiological parameters, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP), body mass index (BMI), body weight, and waist circumference (WC).
methodsPubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from inception to May 30, 2025, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NLCR to usual care in adult patients with CVDs (e.g., coronary heart disease, acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, chronic heart failure, and atrial fibrillation). Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were pooled using random-effects models, and heterogeneity, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsEleven RCTs (15 records, N = 1146 participants) were included, with mean ages of ~59 years in both intervention (133 male, 415 female) and control groups (126 male, 407 female). Nurse-led cardiac rehabilitation significantly reduced SBP (SMD = -0.20; 95% CI: 0.34 to -0.05) and DBP (SMD = -0.20; 95% CI: -0.37 to -0.03) compared to usual care, with low heterogeneity across studies. A significant reduction in body weight was also observed (SMD = -0.27; 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.07), while changes in BMI and WC did not reach statistical significance. A 12-week follow-up optimized blood pressure improvements, while longer durations better influenced anthropometric outcomes.
conclusionNurse-led cardiac rehabilitation improves hemodynamics and modestly reduces weight in cardiac patients, supporting its inclusion in standard rehab protocols. Optimizing program duration may enhance outcomes. Future research should assess NLCR's components and long-term benefits. #W.Z. and Q.W. contributed equally in this study.
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.