Association Between Type D Personality and Cardiovascular Disease History: Cross-Sectional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Type D personality, characterized by high negative affectivity and social inhibition, has been linked to poorer mental health and heightened risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Although previous studies have examined associations between type D personality, psychological distress, and cardiovascular disease (CVD), many have assessed these factors independently, relied on clinical samples, or overlooked the simultaneous assessment of psychological distress and CVD history. Consequently, less is known about how type D traits relate to emotional distress and CVD history within the general population. Understanding these relationships may support early identification of at-risk individuals and strengthen the integration of psychological screening into cardiovascular care. Objective: This study aimed to (1) examine associations between type D personality, emotional distress (depression, anxiety, and stress), and self-reported CVD history; (2) compare distress levels among participants with and without CVD history; and (3) determine whether type D personality predicts emotional distress independent of demographic factors and CVD history. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 146 adults aged 30 to 85 years, recruited through convenience and snowball sampling on social media. Type D personality was assessed using the Type D Scale-14, and emotional distress was measured using the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 items. CVD history was captured through a single self-report question regarding prior diagnosis of a cardiovascular condition. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample. Two-tailed independent samples t tests compared distress between individuals with and without type D personality and between participants with and without CVD history. Pearson correlation coefficients examined associations among key variables. Hierarchical multiple regression assessed whether type D personality predicted emotional distress beyond age, gender, education, and CVD history. Results: Of the 146 participants, 40 (27.4%) reported a history of CVD and 62 (42.5%) met criteria for type D personality. Individuals with type D personality exhibited significantly higher depression, anxiety, and stress levels than non-type D participants (all P<.001). Participants with CVD history also reported greater distress compared with those without CVD history. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that type D personality remained a strong independent predictor of emotional distress (β=.46; P<.001) after adjusting for demographics and CVD history. CVD history made an additional but smaller contribution to distress (β=.18; P=.008). These findings highlight the cumulative influence of personality traits and cardiovascular background on psychological well-being. Conclusions: Type D personality traits have been associated with higher levels of psychological distress and with a greater likelihood of self-reported CVD history in the general population. Type D personality remained a significant predictor of distress after accounting for demographic factors and cardiovascular history, underscoring its potential role in early psychological risk identification. Incorporating brief personality and mental health screening into cardiovascular assessment may support more comprehensive care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».