Adhärenz in Herzgruppen: Ein prospektiver, randomisierter Vergleich einer konventionell durchgeführten Herzgruppe zu einer Tai-Chi-Herzgruppe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In patients with cardiac diseases, lifestyle changes such as an increase in physical activity are recommended to prevent further cardiac events. In Germany this is possible by attending outpatient heart groups. A problem inherent in these programs is the lack of adherence since more than two thirds of patients stop attending cardiac rehabilitation programs after six months. An alternative to the conventional implementation of heart groups is Tai Chi, which was found to improve adherence to cardiac rehabilitation programs in international studies. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to a conventional heart group or a heart group with Tai Chi exercises. At the beginning of the study, a medical history was taken and physical and instrumental tests were carried out, including an assessment of anxiety/depression (HADS questionnaire) and physical well-being (SD-12). Follow-up tests were performed every three months. RESULTS: Patients were 62.6 ± 8.5 years old, the mean BMI was 28.6 ± 62 kg/m(2), and the proportion of women was 29.8 %. The groups were different in terms of age (conventional heart group: 65.0 ± 7.5; Tai Chi group: 59.9 ± 8.9 years). Therefore, age-adjusted analyses were performed in addition to the planned analyses. Regarding the primary endpoint of the study, there was no difference between the groups. After twelve months, 50 % of subjects were active in the Tai Chi group and 48 % in the conventional heart group (odds ratio 0.92, p = 0.891). After adjustment for age by logistic regression, the odds ratio was 0.47 (p = 0.285). Furthermore, both the participation period in weeks (Tai Chi group: 43.3 ± 26.0; conventional group: 45.5 ± 24.2, p = 0.766) and the participation rate (Tai Chi group: 66.8 ± 19.2 % Tai Chi, conventional group: 76.3 ± 16.5 %, p = 0.074) did not differ between the two groups. A further analysis showed a non-significant trend for improvement of anxiety, depression and physical well-being in the Tai Chi group compared with the conventional group. CONCLUSION: The insight gained in international studies regarding a better adherence to Tai Chi-guided prevention programs was not transferable to heart group participants from Germany. However, there was a trend regarding a better mental condition in the Tai Chi group.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".