Participant Exercise-Session Attendance in Community-Based, Bridging, and Hospital-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Retrospective Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background A paucity of studies have investigated participant attendance in community-based and hybrid cardiac rehabilitation programs in the Canadian setting. We compared exercise-session attendance of community-based, bridging (hospital plus community-based), and hospital-based participants who attended a high-volume cardiac rehabilitation program in Alberta, Canada. Methods Exercise sessions attended and participant characteristics were collected and analyzed from 230 records of patients who attended cardiac rehabilitation between 2016 and 2019. Community-based ( n = 74) and bridging ( n = 41) program participants were age- and sex-matched in a 1:1 ratio to hospital-based participants. The number of exercise sessions attended was compared among program groups, between female and male patients, and for patients with vs without cardiac surgery. The percentage of exercise sessions attended was also compared among program groups. Results Bridging participants attended the greatest number of exercise sessions (median = 10.0 sessions) and demonstrated a significantly higher percentage of sessions attended (91%, 25th and 75th percentile interquartile range [IQR] = 64, 100%) than matched hospital participants (median = 6.0 sessions; 63%, 25, 75 IQR = 13, 94%; P = 0.01). Percentage of sessions attended did not differ for bridging and community-based participants ( P = 0.30). Exercise-session attendance was similar for community-based participants (median = 6.0 sessions; 75%, 25, 75 IQR = 38%, 88%) vs their hospital matches (median = 6.0 sessions; 81%, 25, 75 IQR = 38%, 100%; P ≥ 0.37), as well as for female vs male patients (median = 7.0 sessions for both sexes; P = 0.66), and for surgical vs nonsurgical patients (median = 7.0 sessions; P = 0.48). Female patients in the bridging program attended significantly more exercise sessions in the community, compared with male patients in the bridging program ( P = 0.02). Conclusions Bridging participants attended the most exercise sessions overall and demonstrated a higher percentage attendance than hospital-based participants. These results suggest that a hybrid program consisting of hospital and community-based exercise was favourable for exercise-session attendance. Given modern approaches to de-medicalize cardiac rehabilitation, our findings further support the provision of community program offerings, without detriment to patient session attendance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".