Profile of women choosing mixed-sex, women-only, and home-based cardiac rehabilitation models and impact on utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared characteristics and program utilization in women electing to participate in mixed-sex, women-only, or home-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR). In this retrospective cohort study, electronic records of CR participants in Toronto who were offered the choice of program model between January 2017-February 2020 were analyzed. There were 727 women (74.7% mixed, 22.0% women-only, 3.3% home-based) who initiated CR. There were significantly more women who were not working in women-only than mixed-sex (80.4% vs 64.1%; P = .009). Session adherence was significantly greater with mixed-sex (58.8 ± 28.9% sessions attended/25) than women-only (54.3 ± 26.3% sessions attended/25; P = .046); program completion was significantly lower with home-based (33.3%) than either supervised model (59.7%; P = .035). Participation in women-only CR may be less accessible. Further research is needed to investigate offering remote women-focused sessions or peer support.
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 | 0.004 | 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".