The authors regret that citation [[39]Khushhal A. Nichols S. Carroll S. Ingle L. Insufficient exercise intensity for clinical benefit? Monitoring and quantification of a community-based Phase III cardiac rehabilitation programme: a United Kingdom perspective.Plos One. 2019; 14e0217654https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217654"Crossref PubMed Google Scholar] was incorrectly referenced. Reference [[39]Khushhal A. Nichols S. Carroll S. Ingle L. Insufficient exercise intensity for clinical benefit? Monitoring and quantification of a community-based Phase III cardiac rehabilitation programme: a United Kingdom perspective.Plos One. 2019; 14e0217654https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217654"Crossref PubMed Google Scholar] should read: The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. DOI of original article: doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.01.044 Funding was received from the Hull and East Riding Cardiac Trust Fund , United Kingdom (No grant ID). Funding was used to analyse blood samples for the CARE CR study. The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest. Routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation does not increase aerobic fitness: A CARE CR studyInternational Journal of CardiologyVol. 305PreviewRecent evidence suggests that routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) may not lead to a substantial increase in estimated peak oxygen uptake (V̇O2peak). This could reduce the potential benefits of CR and explain why CR no longer improves patient survival in recent studies. We aimed to determine whether routine exercise-based CR increases V̇O2peak using gold-standard maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), and to quantify the exercise training stimulus which might be insufficient in patients undertaking CR. Full-Text PDF Open Access