Sex differences in the physiological responses to cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heart disease is one of the leading causes of death in Canada. Many heart disease patients are referred for cardiac rehabilitation, a multidisciplinary outpatient program often consisting of exercise training. Cardiac rehabilitation has been proven to be a successful secondary preventative measure in reducing mortality and improving overall health in heart disease patients, and its completion is important for both sexes as there is growing evidence that women benefit as much as men, if not more, with regard to mortality. It is important to note that previous studies have shown that healthy men and women respond differently to aerobic and resistance training, possibly due to hormones, body composition, autonomic and/or cardiovascular differences. However, evaluating sex differences in the efficacy of standard cardiac rehabilitation programs has not yet been fully explored with many studies investigating clinical or anthropometric data but not physiological outcomes. This systematic review aimed to investigate physiological differences in male and female heart disease patients after cardiac rehabilitation. The inclusion criteria were purposefully broad to encompass many cardiac rehabilitation scenarios, many cardiac disease states, and various program lengths and intensities with the intention of highlighting strengths and weaknesses of the current body of literature. METHODS: To conduct a synthesis without meta-analysis, a search strategy was generated to examine the relationships between heart disease patients, a supervised exercise program, physiological outcomes, and sex differences. The review was registered (Prospero: CRD42021251614) and the following databases were searched from inception to 19 December 2023: APA PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), Embase (Ovid), Emcare Nursing (Ovid), Medline All (Ovid; includes PubMed non-Medline), and Web of Science Core Collection. Eighty-eight studies pertaining to fitness, metabolism, body composition, respiratory function, cardiac function and C-reactive protein underwent data extraction. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Importantly, this review suggests that men and women respond similarly to a wide-range of cardiac rehabilitation programs in most physiological variables. However, many studies discussing maximal oxygen consumption, functional capacity, six-minute walk distances, and grip strength suggest that men benefit more. Further research is required to address certain limitations, such as appropriate statistical methods and type/intensity of exercise interventions.
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 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 | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".