MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 202: Outcomes of Region-Wide Cardiac Rehabilitation

2018· article· en· W4232759104 on OpenAlexaffabout
Neville Suskin, Stephanie J. Frisbee, Saverio Stranges, Adam Pierce, Joseph A. Ricci

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityThe Scarborough HospitalSt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralRehabilitationCohortSocioeconomic statusEmergency medicineResidencePhysical therapyInternal medicinePopulationDemographyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended for patients with cardiovascular disease, however the impact of a region-wide, centrally managed CR model with local non-medical community-based delivery of CR is unknown in a universal health care system setting. Objectives: To determine the impact of a regional 6-month, once per week supervised exercise session CR model on mortality and re-hospitalization compared to a matched control within a regional health care system. Methods: The regional CR service comprised: a standardized regional referral strategy for patients with established cardiac disease including stable heart failure, local (within a 30-minute drive time from place of residence) CR service delivery by trained CR professionals. Patient data that was prospectively entered into a regional CR database for patients referred to CR from 2012 through 2014, was linked to government mandated administrative databases and all-cause mortality and hospitalization rates were compared between patients who were referred to CR vs. a matched cohort who were not. Matching included age, sex, year of referral, socioeconomic status, and cardiac condition at hospital discharge. Mortality and re-hospitalization were assessed at 1-yr post index cardiac event excluding the initial 6-month period to account for immortal time bias. Results: Fewer patients who completed CR compared to matched controls died (14/1,318 or 1.1% vs. 31/1,318 or 2.4%, p=0.011), or were readmitted to hospital (128 or 9.7% vs. 190 or 14.4%, p<0.001). Fewer patients who started but did not complete CR (CR non-completers) died compared to matched controls (10/639 or 1.6% vs. 21/639 or 3.3%, p=0.045), however there was no difference in hospital readmission rates between CR non-completers compared to matched controls (18.0% vs. 14.9%, p=0.13). More patients who were referred to CR but did not enroll in CR, died compared to matched controls (241/3,933 or 6.1% vs. 196/3,933 or 5.0%, p=0.027), or were readmitted to hospital (932 or 23.7% vs. 643 or 16.3%, p<0.001). Conclusions: In a universal health-care system, patients who completed a regionally coordinated, locally delivered, standardized CR program close to home, experienced lower mortality or re-hospitalization rates compared to matched patients not referred to CR. This association was not likely due to a referral bias as patients who were referred to CR but did not enroll in CR faired worse, not better, compared to matched non-CR referred patients. Health care system decision makers (e.g. provincial governments in Canada) should strongly consider funding regional CR 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207