Trial reportJournal of rehabilitation medicine2026
Women and men profit equally from cardiac rehabilitation: a secondary analysis of the OPTICARE RCT.
Trial report in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2026. 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
purposeTo explore sex-specific differences in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) outcomes.
methodsAerobic capacity (6-Minute Walk Test), physical behaviour (accelerometer), cardiovascular risk profile (weight, blood pressure, cholesterol), and psychosocial well-being (questionnaires) were measured in patients after an acute coronary syndrome (147 women, 642 men) at CR start and completion, and 18 months' follow-up. Sex differences were studied using GEE models adjusted for age and differences in baseline characteristics. Additionally, whether men and women met targets associated with health risk reductions was assessed.
resultsBoth sexes experienced similar CR benefits. Only for depressive symptoms did women show larger improvements (HADS score; ♀: -2.7 vs ♂: -1.1; p = 0.017). Nevertheless, long-term follow-up revealed women still lagged in meeting targets for physical activity (♀: 76.5% vs ♂: 93.1%; p < 0.001) and anxiety symptoms (♀: 75.5% vs ♂: 86.8%; p < 0.001), while men lagged in meeting aerobic capacity targets (♀: 71.3% vs ♂: 58.8%; p < 0.001).
conclusionWomen experience similar CR benefits to men in aerobic capacity, physical behaviour, cardiovascular risk profile, anxiety, and quality of life, with greater improvement in depressive symptoms. However, target values were less often met by women in physical behaviour and psychosocial well-being, and by men in aerobic capacity. Tailored CR programmes may be needed to address the unique needs of women and men.
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.