The Effectiveness of Interventions to Maintain Exercise and Physical Activity in Post-Cardiac Rehabilitation Populations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cardiac rehabilitation is a medically supervised program addressing health behavior changes and promoting self-management among individuals with heart disease. This includes initiation of regular physical activity. However, long-term physical activity after cardiac rehabilitation among this population remains a challenge. METHODS: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials were identified by searching multiple databases and were selected if they evaluated an intervention with a physical activity or exercise component among individuals who completed cardiac rehabilitation. A descriptive synthesis was performed for all studies and means and standard deviations were used for meta-analysis when possible. Risk of bias, heterogeneity, and publication bias were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and 19 were included in the meta-analysis. The mean age of participants across studies was 60 yr and 80% were male. Descriptive synthesis of the studies combined with meta-analysis results provided evidence of increased physical activity among intervention groups compared with control groups at follow-up. CONCLUSION: There is evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions aimed at maintaining physical activity and exercise among adults who have completed cardiac rehabilitation.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it