The Effectiveness of Cardiac Rehabilitation on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Women with Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2019, the American Heart Association recommended multimodal cardiac rehabilitation (CR) as an effective and viable strategy to mitigate cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in early-stage cancer survivors, yet little prospective data was available to support the recommendation. This thesis prospectively assessed the effectiveness of a 16-week CR program on CVD risk factors among 50 women with breast cancer. Participants completed a cardiopulmonary exercise test, 12-hour fasted venipuncture, a series of questionnaires, and wore a pedometer for seven days before and after program completion. The CR program elicited significant improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, peak oxygen pulse, anaerobic threshold, diet quality, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, and cancer-related fatigue. However, anthropometric measures, blood lipids, stress, and depressive symptoms did not change. Breast cancer stage, diet quality, and cancer-related fatigue predicted the change in VO2peak following program completion. These findings suggest CR is effective at reducing select CVD risk factors in women with breast cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".