ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Metacognitive Therapy in Cardiac Rehabilitation: Staff Barriers and Enablers to Training in an Evidence-Based Psychological Treatment for Anxiety and Depression.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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
backgroundThis study was designed to explore cardiac rehabilitation (CR) practitioners' experiences and perceptions of group metacognitive therapy training, identifying the facilitators and barriers encountered.
methodsA nested qualitative study using reflexive thematic analysis was conducted as part of PATHWAY-Beacons (National Institute for Health and Care Research 202956), a mixed-methods study evaluating the implementation of group metacognitive therapy as part of routine care in CR services. Practitioners from 6 CR services in England enrolled in interviews at 3 stages: before training, after training, and after delivering all group sessions.
resultsNine practitioners participated in the study, with 7 completing all 4 interviews, 1 completing 2 interviews (pre- and posttraining), and another completing just 1 (pretraining). Key enablers for effective training emerged in 3 subthemes: training delivery style, essential training components, and the online training format. These aspects contributed positively to the practitioners' training experiences and improved their understanding of group metacognitive therapy. Conversely, barriers included issues related to training structure, staff skepticism, and specific additional training needs.
conclusionThe findings support the positive value of training CR staff in group metacognitive therapy and offer important insights for enhancing the delivery and uptake of training within the National Health Service. Although the study findings represent views of a predominantly female sample, this reflects the composition of the current CR workforce.
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.