MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387640720 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2023.10.008

Women-Focused Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery Around the World and Program Enablers to Support Broader Implementation

2023· article· en· W4387640720 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeYork UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRehabilitationMedicineProcess managementPsychologyBusinessPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Women are less likely than men to use cardiac rehabilitation (CR); thus, women-focused (W-F) CR was developed. Implementation of W-F CR globally was investigated, as well as barriers and enablers to its delivery. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a survey was administered to CR programs via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) from May to July, 2023. Potential respondents were identified via the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation's network. Results: A total of 223 responses were received from 52 of 111 countries (46.8% country response rate) in the world that have any CR, across all 6 World Health Organization regions. Thirty-three programs (14.8%) from 30 countries reported offering any W-F programming. Programs commonly did offer elements preferred by women and recommended, namely, the following: patient choice of session time (n = 151; 70.6%); invitations for informal care providers and/or partners to attend sessions (n = 121; 57.1%); CR staff that have expertise in women and heart diseases (n = 112; 53.3%); separate changerooms for women (n = 38; 52.8%); and discussion of CR referral with patients (n = 112; 52.1%). Main barriers to delivery of W-F exercise were physical resources (n = 33; 14.8%), space (n = 30; 13.5%), and staff time (n = 26; 11.7%) and expertise (n = 33; 10.3%). Main barriers to delivery of W-F education were human resources (n = 114; 51.1%), educational resources (n = 26; 11.7%), and expertise in the content (n = 74; 33.2%). Enablers of W-F education delivery were availability of materials, in multiple modalities, as well as educated staff and financial resources. Conclusions: Despite the benefits, W-F CR is not commonly offered globally. Considering the barriers and enablers identified, the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation is developing resources to expand delivery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.371 · 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