Abstract 14493: Strength- and Aerobic-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Improves Intermediate Outcomes and Functional Capacity in Patients With Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness during comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is associated with improved cardiovascular prognosis. However, data on the improvement of intermediate outcomes (IOs) also associated with improved prognosis, i.e., low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and systolic blood pressure (SBP), in patients living with diabetes (DM) has been conflicting. The aim of this study is to characterize the integrated effects of combining strength and aerobic training on these IOs and functional capacity for patients living with and without DM. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 377 CR program enrollments from 333 individual patients from 12/2019 - 3/2022. Paired functional capacity was assessed by the metabolic equivalent of task (METs) in a 6-minute walk test (6-MWT), arm curl reps, chair-to-stand reps, and timed up and go test. Demographics and IOs were obtained from the electronic records. P-values were determined by the Chi-square test for categorical variables and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. Results: Baseline demographics and comorbidities of our cohort are described in Table 1. Patients with DM had more CAD and CKD. All patients undergoing CR showed integrated improvements in LDL with functional capacity in this paired analysis. However, patients without DM demonstrated a more significant reduction in SBP (Table 2). Conclusions: Combining strength and aerobic training resulted in integrated improvements in lipids and functional outcomes between patients with and without DM. Our results highlight the efficacy of this combined training for all CR patients, and the need for closer monitoring and management of SBP, a critical disease driver in patients with DM, CAD, and CKD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".