Abstract 18122: Cardiac Rehabilitation in Subjects With Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Higher Risk Patient Population Who Benefit From Attendance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Peripheral vascular disease (PAD) is a common co-morbidity in subjects with coronary artery disease referred for cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Hypothesis: Subjects with PAD derive benefit from CR, but are less likely to attend. Methods: This study included all subjects who were referred to a 12-week, exercise based CR program in Calgary, Canada between 1996 and 2013. Baseline patient characteristics including age, sex, and clinical characteristics were compared between those who completed CR and did not. Rates of attendance and completion were compared by PAD, as was change in exercise capacity measured by exercise testing over the course of CR for all those who completed the program. Unadjusted and adjusted (for all available clinical covariates) Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to assess the association between CR completion and mortality. Models were stratified by PAD diagnosis. Results: A total of 15927 subjects were referred to CR; of those, only 894 (5.6%) had a formal diagnosis of PAD. Subjects with PAD were less likely to complete CR (44.4 vs 55.6% for non-PAD, p Conclusions: Subjects with coexisting PAD in a CR program have a higher mortality and thus are a higher risk CR group. They derive significant mortality reduction from attending CR even though they have less improvement in their exercise capacity. They are, however, less likely to attend and more likely to drop out. Removing barriers to CR attendance and completion is important for those suffering from PAD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".