Part 1—Cardiac Rehabilitation After an Acute Myocardial Infarction: Four Phases of the Programme—Where Do We Stand?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation is a well-established multidisciplinary interventional protocol that plays a pivotal role in the management and prevention of future cardiovascular events in patients with cardiovascular diseases. This patient-tailored approach includes educating patients about their cardiovascular condition and how to control the associated risk factors, an expert-designed lifestyle modification plan that may include exercise, proper nutrition, pharmacological treatment, and psychological support at each step. Exercise training represents a fundamental component of cardiac rehabilitation. It facilitates an enhancement of cardiovascular fitness, a reduction in heart rate, blood pressure and cardiac remodeling, an increase in the left ventricular ejection fraction, the optimization of endothelial function, and a reduction in inflammation and oxidative stress. Moreover, the beneficial physiological changes resulting from cardiac rehabilitation contribute to a reduction in morbidity and mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction (MI). Furthermore, the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines advocate for the initiation of cardiac rehabilitation as early as possible, while the patient who survived MI is still in hospital. This two-part comprehensive review commences with a historical overview of cardiac rehabilitation, followed by a detailed exploration of the four phases of the cardiac rehabilitation programme and its impact on cardiovascular health. In Part 2, the study aims to provide a detailed account of the optimal timing for starting cardiac rehabilitation programs and to examine the factors affecting low engagement in such programs, as well as gender-based differences in adherence.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".