Exercise capacity is recognised as a strong predictor of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in both healthy individuals and patients with coronary heart disease (Novaković et al., 2022). Accordingly, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is recommended as an effective secondary preventive intervention (Task Force Members et al., 2016; Anderson et al., 2016). While earlier studies generally focused on changes in exercise capacity during or immediately after rehabilitation (Uddin et al., 2016), recent research has emphasised the importance of physical activity trajectories on mortality in patients with coronary heart disease (Gonzalez-Jaramillo et al., 2022). This highlights the need to understand changes in exercise capacity and physical activity following the rehabilitation phase.

This study specifically explored changes in exercise capacity (assessed using the six-minute walking test) and physical activity (assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form) one year after a cardiac rehabilitation programme in patients with coronary heart disease. Additionally, the authors examined changes in motivation for physical activity over the 12 months following rehabilitation.

Within the limitations of its observational and monocentric nature, the study presents important findings that can inform future research, generate hypotheses, and guide the design of targeted trials aimed at improving or maintaining exercise capacity and physical activity levels after rehabilitation. The exploration of potential barriers to physical activity 12 months after rehabilitation could inform strategies to increase participation in physical activity post-rehabilitation, thereby improving survival (Moholdt et al., 2018).

This study is well-conducted and clearly presented. The authors' interpretation is balanced and consistent with the study's design and analysis. As noted by one of the reviewers, retention in cardiac rehabilitation studies is challenging, and the authors have done a commendable job in retaining participants. They have also addressed all the reviewers' concerns properly and accurately. I am pleased to recommend this preprint.