Effects of a comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation program on quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life is an important factor to evaluate effects of different interventions in cardiovascular diseases. Improvement in quality of life (QOL) is an important goal for individuals participating in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of comprehensive CR on QOL in patients with cardiovascular disease (CAD). METHODS: In this quasi-experimental before-after study, the files of 100 patients with CAD who were referred to rehabilitation department of Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Institute were studied using a consecutive sampling method. Data collection was performed from the patient's files including their demographics, ejection fraction, functional capacity, and resting heart rate. All patients participated in a comprehensive CR program and completed the validated questionnaire Short-Form 36 Health Status Survey (SF-36), before and after CR program. Data was analyzed based on sex and age groups (≥ 65 and < 65 years) using independent t-test and paired t-test (to compare variables between groups and before and after CR, respectively). RESULTS: After CR, scores of all physical domains of the SF-36 including physical function (PF), physical limitation (PL), body pain (BP) and vitality (V) in addition to general health (GH) were significantly improved in all patients (P < 0.05) compared to the baseline. Patients with age < 65 years had greater improvements in mental health (MH) and social function (SF) than patients with age ≥ 65 years (P < 0.05). Women had greater improvement in PF, V and MH compared to men (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: These results indicated that CR can improve QOL in cardiac patients especially in women. Elderly patients get benefit the same as other patients in physical domains.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".