Burden, screening, and treatment of depressive and anxious symptoms among women referred to cardiac rehabilitation : a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women with cardiovascular disease experience a significantly greater burden of psychosocial distress than men. Clinical practice guidelines promote screening in cardiac rehabilitation (CR).\n \nThe objectives of this thesis were to describe the burden of psychosocial distress, screening, forms of treatment, awareness of elevated symptoms, and whether receipt of treatment was related to subsequent psychosocial distress symptom severity, within women referred to CR. \n\nThis study presents a secondary analysis of a multi-centre trial of women outpatients randomized to 1 of 3 CR models. Consenting participants were asked to complete an initial and follow-up survey 6 months later, and clinical data were extracted from charts. \n\nFindings reiterate that despite clinical recommendations, few women reported being screened for psychological distress, and when screened, only approximately 1/5th were informed of their results. When treated, most women were prescribed anti-depressants by their family doctor. Unfortunately therapy was not related to improvements in symptoms.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".