Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38774382›Full record

ReviewEuropean heart journal. Digital health2024

Key features in telehealth-delivered cardiac rehabilitation required to optimize cardiovascular health in coronary heart disease: a systematic review and realist synthesis.

Victor M Gallegos-Rejas, Jonathan C Rawstorn, Robyn Gallagher, Ray Mahoney, Emma E Thomas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European heart journal. Digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. A cardiac-rehab home-based mHealth program to improve physical activity in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Victor M Gallegos-RejasCentre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Ground Floor Building 33, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9856-4848
Jonathan C RawstornInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9755-7993
Robyn GallagherSusan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, The University of Sydney, Western Ave, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5588-9351
Ray MahoneyCSIRO Health & Biosecurity, Australian e-Health Research Centre, Surgical, Treatment and Rehabilitation Service-STARS Level 7, 296 Herston Rd, Herston 4029, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6183-4071
Emma E ThomasCentre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Ground Floor Building 33, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8415-0521

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Telehealth-delivered cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes can potentially increase participation rates while delivering equivalent outcomes to facility-based programmes. However, key components of these interventions that reduce cardiovascular risk factors are not yet distinguished. This study aims to identify features of telehealth-delivered CR that improve secondary prevention outcomes, exercise capacity, participation, and participant satisfaction and develop recommendations for future telehealth-delivered CR. The protocol for our review was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (#CRD42021236471). We systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database) for randomized controlled trials comparing telehealth-delivered CR programmes to facility-based interventions or usual care. Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and then full texts. Using a qualitative review methodology (realist synthesis), included articles were evaluated to determine contextual factors and potential mechanisms that impacted cardiovascular risk factors, exercise capacity, participation in the intervention, and increased satisfaction. We included 37 reports describing 26 randomized controlled trials published from 2010 to 2022. Studies were primarily conducted in Europe and Australia/Asia. Identified contextual factors and mechanisms were synthesized into four theories required to enhance participant outcomes and participation. These theories are as follows: (i) early and regular engagement; (ii) personalized interventions and shared goals; (iii) usable, accessible, and supported interventions; and (iv) exercise that is measured and monitored. Providing a personalized approach with frequent opportunities for bi-directional interaction was a critical feature for success across telehealth-delivered CR trials. Real-world effectiveness studies are now needed to complement our findings.

Indexed as

Cardiac rehabilitationRealist reviewSecondary preventionSystematic reviewTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID38774382
PMCPMC11104477

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.