Safety and predictors of adherence of a new rehabilitation program for older women with congestive heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of a cardiac rehabilitation program for older women with Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) and determine if certain factors influence adherence. METHODS: Women over the age of 65 with CHF attended an exercise program supervised by a physiotherapist. Quality of life was measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and severity of disease by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class. Subjects were classified into those who attended 90% or more of the sessions and those who attended less than 90% of the sessions. RESULTS: Fifty-one subjects were studied. Eight subjects did not attend any sessions. Of the 43 attendees, the average percentage of sessions attended was 87%. There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, MLHFQ or NYHA Class. There was only one adverse event out of 280 participant attendances. CONCLUSIONS: The program had a high level of adherence in this population. Age, MLHFQ or NYHA Class did not impact on session attendance. Our data suggests this program is safe for this population. Further research is needed to determine other predictors of attendance and the examination of safety issues and long-term adherence to exercise in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".