Cardiac rehabilitation, physical activity, and the effectiveness of activity monitoring devices on cardiovascular patients: an umbrella review of systematic reviews
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
AIMS: To consolidate the evidence on the effectiveness of activity-monitoring devices and mobile applications on physical activity and health outcomes of patients with cardiovascular disease who attended cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes. METHODS AND RESULTS: An umbrella review of published randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses was conducted. Nine databases were searched from inception to 9 February 2022. Search and data extraction followed the JBI methodology for umbrella reviews and PRISMA guidelines. Nine systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, comparing outcomes of participants in CR programmes utilizing devices/applications, to patients without access to CR with devices/applications. A wide range of physical, clinical, and behavioural outcomes were reported, with results from 18 712 participants. Meta-analyses reported improvements in physical activity, minutes/week [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10-0.35] and activity levels (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.07-0.51), and a reduction in sedentariness [risk ratio (RR) 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.75] in CR participants, compared with usual care. Of clinical outcomes, the risk of re-hospitalization reduced significantly (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89), and there was reduction (non-significant) in mortality (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05-1.54). From the behavioural outcomes, reviews reported improvements in smoking behaviour (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67-1.13) and total diet quality intake (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.94) among CR patients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of devices/applications was associated with increase in activity, healthy behaviours, and reductions in clinical indicators. Although most effect sizes indicate limited clinical benefits, the broad consistency of the narrative suggests devices/applications are effective at improving CR patients' outcomes.
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 | 0.043 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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