The Women@Heart NS Pilot Project: Rationale and Design of a Community-Based Peer Support Program for Women Living With Heart Disease in Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation is associated with lower mortality and improved psychosocial outcomes. However, disparities exist in referral and access to cardiac rehabilitation for Nova Scotian women, a situation exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Women@Heart (W@H) is a 4-month community-based peer support program developed and validated by the University of Ottawa Heart Institute, for women living with heart disease. The program aims to empower women with coping strategies, provide a supportive learning environment, and establish volunteer advocacy groups. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the implementation feasibility of the W@H program for women living in Nova Scotia. The primary outcome is the implementation feasibility of W@H in Nova Scotia, measured through participant attendance and program completion rates. Peer leaders will record participant attendance. The psychosocial impact of W@H will be assessed using psychometric tools that measure the following: social support, adaptive coping, stress, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and health-related and disease-specific quality of life. Data will be collected using a pre- and post-program questionnaire administered to participants. The pilot program is expected to commence in the first quarter of 2024. One peer leader with lived experience of heart disease, who has previously completed the W@H program as a participant, has been trained. Participants have been identified through healthcare provider referral, self-referral, brochures, and peer-networking. Each cohort will consist of 5-10 participants. The W@H pilot project will assess the implementation feasibility and the impact of community-based peer support on the well-being of Nova Scotian women living with heart disease.
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 | 0.023 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".