ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: Evidence, Coverage, and Implementation.
Review in Journal of clinical 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
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multicomponent secondary prevention intervention that improves functional capacity and quality of life across cardiac diagnoses, yet remains markedly underused in heart failure (HF). Existing reviews treat efficacy, coverage, delivery, and equity separately; this narrative review integrates them to clarify why uptake in HF remains low despite an established evidence base. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from January 2009 through December 2025, prioritizing clinical practice guidelines, landmark trials, systematic reviews, registry analyses, and U.S. policy documents, with narrative synthesis across efficacy, coverage, delivery, and equity. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), exercise-based CR consistently improves peak oxygen consumption by roughly 15 to 17 percent, improves health status, and reduces short-term all-cause hospitalization. In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), supervised exercise improves functional capacity and quality of life, but a large pragmatic outcome trial and Medicare coverage remain lacking. In appropriately selected, clinically stable patients, hybrid and virtual delivery produce comparable short-term functional and quality-of-life gains, with more limited direct evidence for hard clinical endpoints. Closing the HFpEF coverage gap, automating HFrEF referral, diversifying delivery, and embedding equity across the CR pipeline are actionable priorities for realizing CR's potential in HF.
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.