MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322762392 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2322298/v1

The characteristics of cardiac rehabilitation interventions provided by nurses: A scoping review

2023· review· en· W4322762392 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Bernier, Mylaine Breton, Marie-Ève Poitras

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPsychological interventionRehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyTelehealthMEDLINENursingCochrane LibraryIntervention (counseling)TelemedicineMeta-analysisHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: A cardiac rehabilitation program (CRP) is an interdisciplinary intervention that combines the medical, social, and educational components necessary for cardiac rehabilitation so that people with cardiovascular disease can regain their functional abilities and improve their quality of life. In CRP, nurses have an essential role in patient care and service coordination. The basic components of a CRP that can be adapted remain unknown, as there are many different CRP. This study aims to identify the key features of a CRP that can inform public policy. Currently, there is no synthesis of the characteristics of services in CRP that can be adapted in the literature. This study aims to identify the main characteristics of cardiac rehabilitation programs nurses offer when providing cardiac rehabilitation after a myocardial infarction. Methods: A scoping study was conducted according to Arksey and O'Malley (2005). We systematically searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane. Only empirical studies published between 2005 and 2022 with a CRP involving a nurse were included. CRP characteristics were classified, coded, and validated with the research team and categorized for analysis. Results: Fifteen articles were included in which 15 rehabilitation programs were identified. In total, four programs were offered, individualized nurse follow-up (n = 8), CRP solicitation (n = 2), use of technology (n = 3), and telehealth (n = 1). Overall, the features were categorized into four program types: 1) Interventions promoting early recruitment of participants; 2) Interventions promoting technology use; 3) Interventions based on multiple components; and 4) Interventions based on surveillance and monitoring activities. Conclusion: With the increase in myocardial infarctions, more and more patients need CRP. Nurse monitoring during CRP can be offered with several components to facilitate follow-up. These different follow-up components allow the nurse to anticipate care issues and obstacles the patient may encounter throughout cardiac rehabilitation. These elements should be promoted for engagement and participation in CR to improve CR provision. Finally, the characteristics of this study will support the conceptualization of a CR program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0320.037
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→