Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 508

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis

Open access
Dibben, Grace O, Faulkner, James, Oldridge, Neil, Rees, Karen, Thompson, David R, Zwisler, Ann-Dorthe, Taylor, Rod S·2023·European Heart Journal

Abstract

Aims: Coronary heart disease is the most common reason for referral to exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) globally. However, the generalizability of previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is questioned. Therefore, a contemporary updated meta-analysis was undertaken. Methods and results: Database and trial registry searches were conducted to September 2020, seeking RCTs of exercise-based interventions with ≥6-month follow-up, compared with no-exercise control for adults with myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, or following coronary artery bypass graft, or percutaneous coronary intervention. The outcomes of mortality, recurrent clinical events, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness data were narratively synthesized. Meta-regression was used to examine effect modification. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A total of 85 RCTs involving 23 430 participants with a median 12-month follow-up were included. Overall, exercise-based CR was associated with significant risk reductions in cardiovascular mortality [risk ratio (RR): 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64–0.86, number needed to treat (NNT): 37], hospitalizations (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67–0.89, NNT: 37), and myocardial infarction (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.70–0.96, NNT: 100). There was some evidence of significantly improved HRQoL with CR participation, and CR is cost-effective. There was no significant impact on overall mortality (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.89–1.04), coronary artery bypass graft (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.80–1.15), or percutaneous coronary intervention (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.69–1.02). No significant difference in effects was found across different patient groups, CR delivery models, doses, follow-up, or risk of bias. Conclusion: This review confirms that participation in exercise-based CR by patients with coronary heart disease receiving contemporary medical management reduces cardiovascular mortality, recurrent cardiac events, and hospitalizations and provides additional evidence supporting the improvement in HRQoL and the cost-effectiveness of CR.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac747

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 96 references

Cited by

See all 508

Metadata

Authors
Dibben, G. O., Faulkner, J., Oldridge, N., Rees, K., Thompson, D. R., Zwisler, A.-D., & Taylor, R. S.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2023-01-02
Volume
44
Issue
6
Pages
452-469
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W4319300372
Cited by
508
References
96
FWCI
25.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac747
The paper
Dibben, G. O., Faulkner, J., Oldridge, N., Rees, K., Thompson, D. R., Zwisler, A.-D., & Taylor, R. S. (2023). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac747

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.