Bubnova 2019.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: single‐centre RCT Country: Russia Dates participants recruited: NR Maximum follow‐up: 12 months.
Participants	Inclusion criteria: male and female participants of working age (male < 60 years, female < 55 years) with acute MI (3 to 8 weeks prior), signed informed consent to participate, absence of generally accepted contraindications to performing exercise training Exclusion criteria: left ventricular aneurysm with thrombosis, stroke, serious disturbances in the rhythm and conduction of the heart, uncontrolled arterial hypertension with blood pressure ≥ 180/100 mmHg, NYHA class III‐IV heart failure, thromboemboli, aortic aneurysm, history of syncope, thrombophlebitis, phlebothrombosis, musculoskeletal disorders, moderate to severe diabetes, severe concomitant diseases, chronic respiratory, hepatic or renal failure N randomised: total: 300; intervention: 155; comparator: 145. Groups then split into 3 subgroups according to rehabilitation potential (intervention: low n = 32, average n = 55, high n = 68; control: low n = 22, average n = 64, high n = 59) Diagnosis (% of participants): 100% acute MI (68% STEMI) Age (mean ±SD): intervention: 49.9 ± 7.2; comparator 50.9 ± 6.1 Percentage male: intervention: 93.5%, comparator: 92.4% Ethnicity: NR
Interventions	Intervention: physical rehabilitation classes consisting of gymnastics exercises carried out for 60 minutes in groups under supervision of a cardiologist 3 times per week for 1 year. Components: exercise only Setting: centre‐based Exercise programme modality: gymnastic exercises Length of session: 1 hour Frequency: three sessions per week Intensity: not reported Resistance training included? No Total duration: 1 year Co‐interventions: none described Comparator: no exercise training Co‐interventions: none described
Outcomes	HRQoL, mortality, MI
Source of funding	Not reported
Conflicts of interest	None declared
Notes	Paper translated from Russian
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Patients were randomized using the envelope method"; no further detail reported
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Patients were randomized using the envelope method"; no further detail reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No detail regarding outcome assessment blinding was reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No PRISMA flow diagram provided, no N in tables and text unclear about attrition, appears that there was no loss to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No published protocol, outcomes described in methods appear to be reported in the results. Cardiovascular complications unclear