Type D personality among noncardiovascular patient populations: a systematic review
Abstract
Objective This article reviews all available literature concerning the implications of Type D personality (the conjoint effects of negative affectivity and social inhibition) among patients with noncardiovascular conditions.Methods Published papers were included if they studied Type D personality among noncardiovascular patient populations. Twelve articles met our inclusion criteria and were subjected to a methodological quality checklist (e.g., sample size, response rate, Type D measurement).Results The methodological quality of the selected studies was quite good. The noncardiovascular patient populations included chronic pain, asthma, tinnitus, sleep apnea, primary care patients, vulvovaginal candidiasis, mild traumatic brain injury, vertigo, melanoma and diabetic foot syndrome. Type D personality was associated with an increased number or severity of reported health complaints, heightened the perception of negative emotions (e.g., depression and anxiety), had an adverse effect on health-related behaviors, was associated with poor adherence to treatment and significantly reduced effort to perform during diagnostic testing.Conclusion Type D is a vulnerability factor that not only affects people with cardiovascular conditions but also those with other medical conditions. Type D was associated with poor physical and mental health status and poor self-management of the disease. Consequently, including Type D in future studies seems warranted.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many studies have documented poorer general health correlates of Type D in community (rather than CVD) samples.
“While many studies have documented poorer general health correlates of Type D in community (rather than CVD) samples [154, 155]”
From Personality and Longevity: Knowns, Unknowns, and Implications for Public Health and Personalized Medicine (2011) · cites this paper as [154]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 154
- Authors
- Mols, F., & Denollet, J.
- Affiliations
- Tilburg University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Mols, Floortje
- Venue
- General Hospital Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 66-72
- ISSN
- 0163-8343 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2070421477
- Cited by
- 154
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 1.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- General Hospital Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- Type D personality, negative affectivity, social inhibition, chronic pain, asthma, tinnitus, sleep apnea, vaginal candidiasis, mild traumatic brain injury, vertigo, melanoma, diabetic foot, depression, anxiety, medication adherence, health behavior, disease self-management, health complaints
- MeSH terms
- Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Negativism, Personality, Social Isolation, Health Behavior
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review