Relation of heart rate recovery to psychological distress and quality of life in patients with chronic heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychological distress, poor disease-specific quality of life (QoL), and reduction in vagally mediated early heart rate recovery (HRR) after exercise, all previously predicted morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). We hypothesized lower HRR with greater psychological distress and poorer QoL in CHF. DESIGN: All assessments were made at the beginning of a comprehensive cardiac outpatient rehabilitation intervention program. METHODS: Fifty-six CHF patients (mean 58+/-12 years, 84% men) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire. HRR was determined as the difference between HR at the end of exercise and 1 min after exercise termination (HRR-1). RESULTS: Elevated levels of anxiety symptoms (P=0.005) as well as decreased levels of the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire total (P = 0.025), physical (P=0.026), and emotional (P=0.017) QoL were independently associated with blunted HRR-1. Anxiety, total, physical, and emotional QoL explained 11.4, 8, 7.8, and 9.0%, respectively, of the variance after controlling for covariates. Depressed mood was not associated with HRR-1 (P=0.20). CONCLUSION: Increased psychological distress with regard to elevated anxiety symptoms and impaired QoL were independent correlates of reduced HRR-1 in patients with CHF. Reduced vagal tone might explain part of the adverse clinical outcome previously observed in CHF patients in relation to psychological distress and poor disease-specific QoL.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".