Cardiac rehabilitation in Canada and Arab countries: comparing availability and program characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the high burden of cardiovascular diseases in Arab countries, little is known about cardiac rehabilitation (CR) delivery. This study assessed availability, and CR program characteristics in the Arab World, compared to Canada. METHODS: A questionnaire incorporating items from 4 national / regional published CR program surveys was created for this cross-sectional study. The survey was emailed to all Arab CR program contacts that were identified through published studies, conference abstracts, a snowball sampling strategy, and other key informants from the 22 Arab countries. An online survey link was also emailed to all contacts in the Canadian Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation directory. Descriptive statistics were used to describe all closed-ended items in the survey. All open-ended responses were coded using an interpretive-descriptive approach. RESULTS: Eight programs were identified in Arab countries, of which 5 (62.5 %) participated; 128 programs were identified in Canada, of which 39 (30.5%) participated. There was consistency in core components delivered in Arab countries and Canada; however, Arab programs more often delivered women-only classes. Lack of human resources was perceived as the greatest barrier to CR provision in all settings, with space also a barrier in Arab settings, and financial resources in Canada. The median number of patients served per program was 300 for Canada vs. 200 for Arab countries. CONCLUSION: Availability of CR programs in Arab countries is incredibly limited, despite the fact that most responses stemmed from high-income countries. Where available, CR programs in Arab countries appear to be delivered in a manner consistent with Canada.
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 | 0.006 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".