Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8624882›Full record

GuidelineHeart (British Cardiac Society)1996

Cardiac rehabilitation in the United Kingdom: guidelines and audit standards. National Institute for Nursing, the British Cardiac Society and the Royal College of Physicians of London.

D R Thompson, G S Bowman, A L Kitson, D P de Bono, A Hopkins

Abstract readGuidelinePractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Rehabilitation after heart attack.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1996
    Article
  13. Outpatient cardiac rehabilitation: are the potential benefits being realised?Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

D R ThompsonInstitute of Nursing Studies, University of Hull.
G S Bowman
A L Kitson
D P de Bono
A Hopkins

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper summarises a multidisciplinary workshop convened to prepare clinical guidelines and audit standards in cardiac rehabilitation in the United Kingdom. The workshop developed a three element model of the rehabilitation process and identified needs relating to medical and psychosocial care and the potential contributions of exercise, education, secondary prevention, and vocational advice. Draft clinical standards are proposed as a basis for locally developed guidelines and further research.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisExerciseHeart DiseasesHumansMedical AuditPatient Education as TopicSocial SupportUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID8624882
PMCPMC484231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.