MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745677311 · doi:10.1177/1474515117725521

The effect of a peer support intervention on early recovery outcomes in men recovering from coronary bypass surgery: A randomized controlled trial

2017· article· en· W2745677311 on OpenAlexafffund
Tracey J. F. Colella, Kathryn King‐Shier

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersToronto Rehabilitation InstituteHealth Research Board
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPeer supportPsychological interventionSocial supportDepression (economics)Intervention (counseling)Coronary artery bypass surgeryPhysical therapyCardiac surgeryBypass surgeryEmergency medicineArteryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Examine the effect of a professionally-guided telephone peer support intervention on recovery outcomes including depression, perceived social support, and health services utilization after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery men ( N=185) who were randomized before hospital discharge. The intervention arm received telephone-based peer support through weekly telephone calls from a peer volunteer over six weeks, initiated within 3-4 days of discharge. RESULTS: Although a significant difference was detected in pre-intervention depression scores at discharge, there were no differences between groups in changes in depression scores at six weeks ( p=0.08), 12 weeks (0.49) or over time ( p=0.51); and no significant differences in perceived social support scores over time ( p=0.94). At 12 weeks, the intervention group had significantly lower incidence of health services utilization (family physician ( p=0.02) and emergency room ( p=0.04)). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers need to continue to investigate novel interventions to enhance social support and reduce depression in cardiac patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardiovascular NursingSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207