Sex differences in completion of a 12-month cardiac rehabilitation programme: an analysis of 5922 women and men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The reasons for greater premature withdrawal from cardiac rehabilitation programmes (CRP) in women compared with men and differences in baseline predictors of withdrawal have not been extensively studied. METHODS: Reasons for withdrawal from a 12-month CRP in 1089 women and 4833 men were ascertained by interview. Regression analysis was used to determine demographic and baseline medical conditions that predicted noncompletion. RESULTS: Noncompletion was higher in women than men (35 vs. 29%, P<0.001), however, multivariate regression revealed that sex was not the main driver of withdrawal but rather, other factors common to women at entry to CR could predict noncompletion (i.e. not being married, being obese, lower peak oxygen uptake, not having earlier coronary artery bypass graft surgery, being on antidepressant medication and not on lipid lowering or beta-blockade medication). By interview, a greater proportion of women than men withdrew for medical issues (P<0.001), specifically musculoskeletal conditions (P=0.002) and multiple medical problems (P=0.02). A greater proportion of women withdrew for transportation (P<0.001) and family issues (P=0.009), whereas work issues affected men more than women (P=0.009), as did lack of interest (P=0.009). Women were more likely to withdraw than men regardless of age (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Women were significantly more likely to withdraw from CRP than men because of greater medical problems, specifically musculoskeletal and multiple medical reasons. Lack of interest and work obligations were greater barriers for men while transportation and family obligations more often affected women. Difference in withdrawal can be explained by the profile of women rather than by sex independently.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".