Cardiac Rehabilitation Maintenance and Prevention Exercise Program: Effects on Depression and Body Image
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Ontario, individuals who have experienced a cardiac event are prescribed to participate in cardiac rehabilitation. Most research examining the effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation has focused on early phases (i.e., phase 1 and 2) and virtually none has looked at phase 3 maintenance programs, nor have they examined prevention-based programs. Therefore, this study looked at characteristics of those attending a cardiac rehabilitation maintenance and prevention exercise program, differences between those that finished 6-months of the program and those who did not, and the effects of the program on body image and depression. Eligible members (n = 111 males, n = 101 females, Mage = 63.3) of the Brock-Niagara Centre for Health and Well-Being completed anthropometric tests (height, body mass, heart rate, blood pressure) and self-reported measures of body satisfaction and depression at baseline and after 6 months of participating in the program. At baseline, individuals were identified as being at risk for clinical depression and were slightly dissatisfied with their body function and appearance. Three separate two-way ANCOVAS (for depression, satisfaction with function and satisfaction with appearance) showed that responders reported more favorable psychological profiles than non-responders at baseline, with significantly higher levels of satisfaction with body appearance [F (1, 204) = 5.95, p < .05] and function [F (1, 203) = 8.58, p < .05], albeit no differences in depression scores [F (1, 206) = .78, p > .05]. However, men did report lower satisfaction with their body function than women. A two-way mixed MANCOVA was conducted to examine changes in depression and body satisfaction across the 6-month program; there was no significant overall effect [F (1, 67) = 1.48, p > .05]. Our findings suggest that moderately active men and women may not differ on satisfaction with appearance. Given that those who completed 6-months of the program reported higher satisfaction with appearance and function than those who did not, it may be possible to identify those who are likely to drop out of a cardiac rehabilitation maintenance and prevention exercise program and develop programming to improve body image upon program entry to increase 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".