Cited by 21Optimism, Hope, and Well-beingCardiac Health and Mental HealthAcute Myocardial Infarction Research

Optimism During Hospitalization for First Acute Myocardial Infarction and Long-Term Mortality Risk

Weiss-Faratci, Netanela, Lurie, Ido, Benyamini, Yael, Cohen, Gali, Goldbourt, Uri, Gerber, Yariv·2017·Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Abstract

Objective To assess the association between dispositional optimism, defined as generalized positive expectations about the future, and long-term mortality in young survivors of myocardial infarction (MI). Patients and methods A subcohort of 664 patients 65 years and younger, drawn from the longitudinal Israel Study of First Acute Myocardial Infarction, completed an adapted Life Orientation Test (LOT) questionnaire during their index hospitalization between February 15, 1992, and February 15, 1993. Additional sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables were assessed at baseline; mortality follow-up lasted through December 31, 2015. Cox proportional hazards regression models were fit to assess the hazard ratios for mortality associated with LOT-derived optimism. Results The mean age of the participants was 52.4±8.6 years; 98 (15%) were women. The median follow-up period was 22.4 years (25th-75th percentiles, 16.1-22.8 years), during which 284 patients (43%) had died. The mean LOT score was 16.5±4.1. Incidence density rates for mortality in increasing optimism tertiles were 25.4, 25.8, and 16.0 per 1000 person-years, respectively (P Conclusion Higher levels of optimism during hospitalization for MI were associated with reduced mortality over a 2-decade follow-up period. Optimism training and positive psychology should be examined as part of psychosocial interventions and rehabilitation after MI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.09.014

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weiss-Faratci, N., Lurie, I., Benyamini, Y., Cohen, G., Goldbourt, U., & Gerber, Y.
Affiliations
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Gerber, Yariv
Venue
Mayo Clinic Proceedings
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
92
Issue
1
Pages
49-56
ISSN
0025-6196 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2551159504
Cited by
21
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Mayo Clinic Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Keywords
dispositional optimism, acute myocardial infarction, long-term mortality, Life Orientation Test, psychosocial factors, optimism training, positive psychology, psychosocial rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Optimism, Female, Humans, Inpatients, Israel, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Proportional Hazards Models, Survivors

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