2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2009.06.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can low risk cardiac patients be ‘fast tracked’ to Phase IV community exercise schemes for cardiac rehabilitation? A randomised controlled trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
13
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
2
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A number of these factors concern how exercise is reported in terms of the FITT (Frequency, Intensity, Time, Type) principles which are the basis of prescription. Few studies reported all four FITT principles and, in agreement with a review of international studies [14], intensity was least-often reported [36,38,39] despite evidence for its importance in promoting beneficial adaptations to exercise [40]. None of the studies included here reported data on exercise intensity.…”
Section: P=0046)supporting
confidence: 55%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…A number of these factors concern how exercise is reported in terms of the FITT (Frequency, Intensity, Time, Type) principles which are the basis of prescription. Few studies reported all four FITT principles and, in agreement with a review of international studies [14], intensity was least-often reported [36,38,39] despite evidence for its importance in promoting beneficial adaptations to exercise [40]. None of the studies included here reported data on exercise intensity.…”
Section: P=0046)supporting
confidence: 55%
“…None of the studies included here reported data on exercise intensity. Instead authors provided the range of intensities prescribed at each CR centre (e.g.65-80%HRR [38]; 60-80%HRR [36,39].…”
Section: P=0046)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Among the remaining 28 articles , 4 were excluded because they were cohort studies [6,7,9,12], and 4 additional non randomized controlled trials [5,10,19,24] were also excluded. Consequently, a total of 20 reports [2][3][4]8,11,[13][14][15][16][17][18][20][21][22][23][25][26][27][28][29] remained for analysis. Table 1 shows the detail of methodological quality evaluation according to CONSORT 2010 statement.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, there were nine trials (45%) reporting badly, only reporting 30% or less methodological items. The approach to estimation of sample size was reported in 9 (45%) articles [2][3][4]11,13,16,22,25,29]. Randomization methods were reported in four trials (20%) [22,[25][26][27], with all generated by computers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%