SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2025
Equity in pulmonary rehabilitation delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of telerehabilitation in upper limb musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Pulmonary Telerehabilitation and Telemonitoring for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Single-Arm Pilot Feasibility Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Nurses' perspectives on perioperative pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with lung cancer in the pre-implementation phase: a CFIR 2.0-guided study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond Reported Rates: Detection-Adjusted COPD Prevalence and Underdiagnosis Patterns in Colombia.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBarriers to delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation are not evenly distributed across people with chronic lung disease. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate equity in pulmonary rehabilitation delivery and outcomes, in relation to the social determinants of health.
methodsA systematic search of four online databases was undertaken. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Social determinants of health were categorised according to the PROGRESS-Plus framework, and mapped to the Health Equity Implementation Framework. We reported the impact of PROGRESS-Plus factors on pulmonary rehabilitation access, uptake and completion, and outcomes of health-related quality of life and exercise capacity.
results32 studies from 13 countries were included. Place of residence (rurality, travel distance) was consistently associated with poor access and uptake. Uptake was lower for Black people than White people (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.95; two studies, n=1 128 623) and in those of low socioeconomic status (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55-0.73; two studies, n=1 134 811). Men were more likely to complete than women (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.20; eight studies, n=20 509). People who were working were less likely to complete (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.47-1.04; three studies, n=3292). There was no impact of PROGRESS-Plus features on improvements in health-related quality of life or exercise capacity with pulmonary rehabilitation.
conclusionsThere are inequities in delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation. Targeted efforts to improve pulmonary rehabilitation delivery in disadvantaged groups are required, to ensure that all people with chronic lung disease are able to realise its benefits.
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.