Conclusions Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is effective at reducing important clinical outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease .
While our analysis was constrained by the quality of included trials and missing information about intervention components , there appears to be little differential effect of variations in exercise intervention , particularly on mortality outcomes .
Background While the clinical benefits of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation are well established , there is extensive variation in the interventions used within these trials .
It is unknown whether variations in individual components of these exercise interventions provide different relative contributions to overall clinical outcomes .
This study aims to systematic ally examine the relationship between individual components of the exercise intervention in cardiac rehabilitation ( such as intensity and frequency ) and clinical outcomes for people with coronary heart disease .
Addressing Dichotomous Data for Participants Excluded from Trial Analysis: A Guide for Systematic Reviewers
Introduction Systematic review er authors intending to include all r and omized participants in their meta-analyses need to make assumptions about the outcomes of participants with missing data . Objective The objective of this paper is to provide systematic review er authors with a relatively simple guidance for addressing dichotomous data for participants excluded from analyses of r and omized trials . Methods This guide is based on a review of the Cochrane h and book and published method ological research . The guide deals with participants excluded from the analysis who were considered ‘ non-adherent to the protocol ’ but for whom data are available , and participants with missing data . Results Systematic review er authors should include data from ‘ non-adherent ’ participants excluded from the primary study authors ' analysis but for whom data are available . For missing , unavailable participant data , authors may conduct a complete case analysis ( excluding those with missing data ) as the primary analysis . Alternatively , they may conduct a primary analysis that makes plausible assumptions about the outcomes of participants with missing data . When the primary analysis suggests important benefit , sensitivity meta-analyses using relatively extreme assumptions that may vary in plausibility can inform the extent to which risk of bias impacts the confidence in the results of the primary analysis . The more plausible assumptions draw on the outcome event rates within the trial or in all trials included in the meta- analysis . The proposed guide does not take into account the uncertainty associated with assumed events . Conclusions This guide proposes methods for h and ling participants excluded from analyses of r and omized trials . These methods can help in establishing the extent to which risk of bias impacts meta- analysis results
Conclusions Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is effective at reducing important clinical outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease .
While our analysis was constrained by the quality of included trials and missing information about intervention components , there appears to be little differential effect of variations in exercise intervention , particularly on mortality outcomes .
Background While the clinical benefits of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation are well established , there is extensive variation in the interventions used within these trials .
It is unknown whether variations in individual components of these exercise interventions provide different relative contributions to overall clinical outcomes .
This study aims to systematic ally examine the relationship between individual components of the exercise intervention in cardiac rehabilitation ( such as intensity and frequency ) and clinical outcomes for people with coronary heart disease .