Inclusion of People Poststroke in Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs in Canada: A Missed Opportunity for Referral
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
BACKGROUND: Evidence supports establishing a continuum of care from stroke rehabilitation (SR) to cardiac rehabilitation programs (CRPs). It is not known to what extent people poststroke are being integrated. This study aimed to determine the proportion of CRPs that accept referrals poststroke, barriers/facilitators, and eligibility criteria. METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was sent to CRPs across Canada. RESULTS: Of 160 questionnaires sent, 114 representatives (71%) of 130 CRPs responded. Of respondents, 65% (n = 74) reported accepting people with a diagnosis of stroke and doing so for a median of 11 years, 11 offering stroke-specific classes and an additional 6 planning inclusion. However, 62.5% of CRPs reported that < 11 patients participated in the last calendar year despite 88.5% reporting no limit to the number they could enroll. Among CRPs, 25% accepted only patients with concurrent cardiac diagnoses, living in the community (47.8%), and without severe mobility (70.1%), communication (80.6%), or cognitive (85.1%) deficits. The 2 most influential barriers and facilitators among all CRPs were funding and staffing. The fourth greatest barrier was lack of poststroke referrals, and third to sixth facilitators were SR/CRP collaboration to ensure appropriate referrals (third) and to increase referrals (sixth), toolkits for prescribing resistance (fourth), and aerobic training (fifth). CRP characteristics associated with accepting stroke were a hybrid program model, a medium program size, and having a falls prevention component. CONCLUSIONS: Most CRPs accept patients poststroke, but few participate. Therefore, establishing SR/CRP partnerships to increase appropriate referrals, using a toolkit to help operationalize exercise components, and allocating funding/resources to CRPs may significantly increase access to secondary prevention strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it