Relationship between cardiac rehabilitation and survival after acute cardiac hospitalization within a universal health care system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The magnitude and mechanisms of survival benefit associated with cardiac rehabilitation services among real-world populations within a universal health care system remain unclear. METHODS: This retrospective matched cohort study compared the long-term survival of 2042 cardiac rehabilitation participants with 2042 matched controls after an index acute cardiac hospitalization between 1999 and 2003, in Ontario, Canada. Each patient survived at least 1 year without recurrent admissions after discharge from the index hospitalization, and was followed for a mean of 5.25 years. Additional matching criteria included the type of sentinel cardiac events, age, sex, socioeconomic status, geography, previous cardiac and noncardiac hospitalizations. A Cox proportional hazards model further adjusted for baseline cardiovascular risk factors and process factors, cardiovascular risk-factor progression, downstream coronary procedure and evidence-based pharmacotherapy utilization. RESULTS: Cardiac rehabilitation participation was associated with a 50% lower mortality rate (2.6 vs. 5.1%, P<0.001) as compared with population-matched controls. Statistically significant mortality benefits were observed among high-risk patients, and there was no significant interaction among age, cardiac rehabilitation participation, and survival (P=0.22). Associated survival advantages were not meaningfully altered after adjustment for cardiovascular risk-factor progression or the downstream utilization rates of cardiac procedures and evidence-based cardiovascular therapies; survival benefits predominantly applied to those patients that were most compliant with the program. CONCLUSION: Cardiac rehabilitation is associated with significant long-term survival advantages after index cardiovascular hospitalizations. Despite universal access to medical care, such survival advantages seem to be mediated by compliant behaviors more so than by ancillary health service or evidence-based pharmacotherapy utilization.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".