Though clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are an effective and widely used treatment method worldwide, they are as yet not widely accepted in Korea. Given that cardiovascular (CV) disease is the second leading cause of death in Korea, it is urgent that CR programs be developed. In 2008, the Government of Korea implemented CR programs at 11 university hospitals as part of its Regional Cardio-Cerebrovascular Center Project, and 3 additional medical facilities will be added in 2019. In addition, owing to the promotion of CR nationwide and the introduction of CR insurance benefits, 40 medical institutions nationwide have begun CR programs even as a growing number of medical institutions are preparing to offer CR. The purpose of this research was to develop evidence-based CPGs to support CR implementation in Korea. This study is based on an analysis of CPGs elsewhere in the world, an extensive literature search, a systematic analysis of multiple randomized control trials, and a CPG management, development, and assessment committee comprised of thirty-three authors—primarily rehabilitation specialists, cardiologists, and thoracic surgeons in 21 university hospitals and 2 general hospitals. Twelve consultants, primarily rehabilitation, sports medicine, and preventive medicine specialists, CPG experts, nurses, physical therapists, clinical nutritionists, and library and information experts participated in the research and development of these CPGs. After the draft guidelines were developed, 3 rounds of public hearings were held with staff members from relevant academic societies and stakeholders, after which the guidelines were further reviewed and modified. CR involves a more cost-effective use of healthcare resources relative to that of general treatments, and the exercise component of CR lowers CV mortality and readmission rates, regardless of the type of coronary heart disease and type and setting of CR. Individualized CR programs should be considered together with various factors, including differences in heart function and lifestyle, and doing so will boost participation and adherence with the CR program, ultimately meeting the final goals of the program, namely reducing the recurrence of myocardial infarction and mortality rates.

No abstract

Background Many scholarly journals have established their own data-related policies, which specify their enforcement of data sharing, the types of data to be submitted, and their procedures for making data available. However, except for the journal impact factor and the subject area, the factors associated with the overall strength of the data sharing policies of scholarly journals remain unknown. This study examines how factors, including impact factor, subject area, type of journal publisher, and geographical location of the publisher are related to the strength of the data sharing policy. Methods From each of the 178 categories of the Web of Science’s 2017 edition of Journal Citation Reports, the top journals in each quartile (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) were selected in December 2018. Of the resulting 709 journals (5%), 700 in the fields of life, health, and physical sciences were selected for analysis. Four of the authors independently reviewed the results of the journal website searches, categorized the journals’ data sharing policies, and extracted the characteristics of individual journals. Univariable multinomial logistic regression analyses were initially conducted to determine whether there was a relationship between each factor and the strength of the data sharing policy. Based on the univariable analyses, a multivariable model was performed to further investigate the factors related to the presence and/or strength of the policy. Results Of the 700 journals, 308 (44.0%) had no data sharing policy, 125 (17.9%) had a weak policy, and 267 (38.1%) had a strong policy (expecting or mandating data sharing). The impact factor quartile was positively associated with the strength of the data sharing policies. Physical science journals were less likely to have a strong policy relative to a weak policy than Life science journals (relative risk ratio [RRR], 0.36; 95% CI [0.17–0.78]). Life science journals had a greater probability of having a weak policy relative to no policy than health science journals (RRR, 2.73; 95% CI [1.05–7.14]). Commercial publishers were more likely to have a weak policy relative to no policy than non-commercial publishers (RRR, 7.87; 95% CI, [3.98–15.57]). Journals by publishers in Europe, including the majority of those located in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, were more likely to have a strong data sharing policy than a weak policy (RRR, 2.99; 95% CI [1.85–4.81]). Conclusions These findings may account for the increase in commercial publishers’ engagement in data sharing and indicate that European national initiatives that encourage and mandate data sharing may influence the presence of a strong policy in the associated journals. Future research needs to explore the factors associated with varied degrees in the strength of a data sharing policy as well as more diverse characteristics of journals related to the policy strength.

Objective Though clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are an effective and widely used treatment method worldwide, they are as yet not widely accepted in Korea. Given that cardiovascular disease is the second leading cause of death in Korea, it is urgent that CR programs be developed. In 2008, the Government of Korea implemented CR programs at 11 university hospitals as part of its Regional Cardio-Cerebrovascular Center Project, and three additional medical facilities will be added in 2019. In addition, owing to the promotion of CR nationwide and the introduction of CR insurance benefits, 40 medical institutions nationwide have begun CR programs even as a growing number of medical institutions are preparing to offer CR. The purpose of this research was to develop evidence-based CPGs to support CR implementation in Korea. Methods This study is based on an analysis of CPGs elsewhere in the world, an extensive literature search, a systematic analysis of multiple randomized control trials, and a CPG management, development, and assessment committee comprised of 33 authors—primarily rehabilitation specialists, cardiologists, and thoracic surgeons in 21 university hospitals and two general hospitals. Twelve consultants, primarily rehabilitation, sports medicine, and preventive medicine specialists, CPG experts, nurses, physical therapists, clinical nutritionists, and library and information experts participated in the research and development of these CPGs. After the draft guidelines were developed, three rounds of public hearings were held with staff members from relevant academic societies and stakeholders, after which the guidelines were further reviewed and modified. Principal Conclusions CR involves a more cost-effective use of healthcare resources relative to that of general treatments, and the exercise component of CR lowers cardiovascular mortality and readmission rates, regardless of the type of coronary heart disease and type and setting of CR. Individualized CR programs should be considered together with various factors, including differences in heart function and lifestyle, and doing so will boost participation and adherence with the CR program, ultimately meeting the final goals of the program, namely reducing the recurrence of myocardial infarction and mortality rates.

Four international associations, including the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Committee on Publication Ethics, and the World Association of Medical Editors declared the third version of "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing" to ensure transparency and quality in journal publications. This study is aimed at assessing the guidelines from the journals' websites manually. Methods: In this study, three researchers investigate the homepages of 781 academic society-published journals that are registered in the Science Citation Index Expanded and whether these journals are effectively adopting these new guidelines. In this paper, 33 items from the guidelines are examined. The 33 items are rearranged into four different categories: basic journal information; publication ethics; copyright and archiving information; and profit model. The researchers count yes or no after checking the adopting status on the journal homepage and dividing into four scales: 0% to 25% for is rarely practiced, 26% to 50% for is poorly practiced, 51% to 75% for is adequately practiced, and 76% to 100% for is well practiced. Results: Of the 33 items, 10 are found to be poorly or rarely practiced, including readership, data sharing, archiving policies, and profit model information. Conclusion:It could be the most up-to-date indicator of the current status of applying best practice guidelines. Society journal editors especially from Asia should evaluate their journals regarding "Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing".