ArticleJAMA network open2026
Uptake and Inequalities in Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation After Decentralization.
Article in JAMA network open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Despite clinical benefits and guideline recommendations, uptake of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) following coronary artery disease remains suboptimal, with barriers including transportation issues, travel distance, and geographic location. To overcome these barriers, decentralization strategies that move health care to local settings have been developed across several countries. Objective: To determine whether CR uptake improved following decentralization, and whether geographic and social inequalities were reduced. Design, Setting, and Participants: This register-based cohort study used data from 2013 to 2022, with data analysis performed from April to August 2025. This population-based study was conducted within 21 Danish municipalities. All participants were patients aged 30 years or older discharged alive after acute myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients were identified in the Danish National Patient Register. Patients were excluded if they had a previous diagnosis or procedure or did not reside within the study area. Exposures: Travel distance from home to nearest CR facility and educational level. Main Outcomes and Measures: Uptake (attending at least 1 training session within 180 days from discharge) was analyzed using modified Poisson regression to quantify differences in proportions before and after decentralization with adjustment for relevant covariates. Results: A total of 19 375 patients were eligible for the study, and 295 patients with missing information on exposures or covariates were excluded. Among the included 19 080 patients, 13 355 (70.0%) were male, and 10 868 (57.0%) were aged 60 to 79 years. The median (IQR) travel distance was reduced from 15.1 (5.9-25.7) km to 7.2 (2.8-14.8) km after decentralization, and uptake increased by 16% (risk ratio [RR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.19). Among the 20% of patients with the longest travel distance, uptake increased by 45% (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.33-1.58), and geographic inequality was significantly reduced. Among patients with short education, uptake increased by 27% (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.20-1.35), and social inequality was significantly reduced. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 19 080 patients, there was increased uptake of CR after decentralization to primary care, accompanied by significant reductions in geographic and social inequalities. The findings support decentralized delivery of CR as a feasible and equitable model, but ongoing monitoring of quality and safety remains essential.
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.