Cardiorespiratory Fitness Benefits of Long-Term Maintenance-Phase Cardiac Rehabilitation in Males and Females: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigated if associations exist between enrolment delay and VO2peak over five years of maintenance-phase cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in males and females. Method: Data were extracted from the records of participants who had enrolled for ≥ 1 year in CR and completed ≥ 2 cardiopulmonary exercise tests. Mixed model analyses examined VO2peak trajectories for up to five years of enrolment. Interactions between enrolment delay × enrolment duration, baseline age × enrolment duration, and baseline VO2peak × enrolment duration were explored for inclusion in the model. Results: The charts of 151 males (aged 63.9 ± 9.4 y) and 32 females (aged 65.3 ± 9.0 y) were included in the analyses. The enrolment delay following a cardiovascular event was 1.8 ± 3.0 years for males and 1.3 ± 1.7 years for females. No associations were found between enrolment delay × enrolment duration on VO2peak in males (β[SEj, 0.07[0.05]; 95% CI −0.02, 0.16, p = 0.12) or in females (β[SE], 0.07[0.13j; 95% CI −0.18, 0.33, p = 0.57), but predicted trajectories suggest clinically significantly improvements in VO2 peak (range, 1.3 to 1.6 mL/kg/min). Conclusions: Early enrolment in CR is recommended and encouraged, but the benefits of long-term CR are possible despite delays.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".