Relationship between physical activity and long-term outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims The aims of this study were to ascertain the relationship between level of physical activity and outcomes and to discriminate the determinants of physical activity performance or avoidance. Methods CLARIFY is an international prospective registry of 32,370 consecutive outpatients with stable coronary artery disease who were followed for up to five years. Patients were grouped according to the level and frequency of physical activity: i) sedentary ( n = 5223; 16.1%); ii) only light physical activity most weeks (light; n = 16,634; 51.4%); iii) vigorous physical activity once or twice per week (vigorous ≤ 2×; n = 5427; 16.8%); iv) vigorous physical activity three or more times per week (vigorous >2×; n = 5086; 15.7%). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke. Results Patients performing vigorous physical activity ≤2 × had the lowest risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.93; p = 0.0031) taking the light group as reference. Engaging in more frequent exercise did not result in further outcome benefit. All-cause death, cardiovascular death, and stroke occurred less frequently in patients performing vigorous physical activity ≤2×. However, the rate of myocardial infarction was comparable between the four physical activity groups. Female sex, peripheral artery disease, diabetes, previous myocardial infarction or stroke, pulmonary disease and body mass index all emerged as independent predictors of lower physical activity. Conclusion Vigorous physical activity once or twice per week was associated with superior cardiac outcomes compared with patients performing no or a low level of physical activity in outpatients with stable coronary artery disease.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".