Cited by 64Cardiac Health and Mental HealthHealth disparities and outcomesCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors

Mastery is associated with cardiovascular disease mortality in men and women at apparently low risk.

Surtees, Paul G., Wainwright, Nicholas W. J., Luben, Robert, Wareham, Nicholas J., Bingham, Sheila A., Khaw, Kay-Tee·2010·Health Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We examine the prospective relationship between mastery, where limited mastery is defined as the inability to control negative emotions (and perceiving stressful experiences as beyond personal control), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality particularly among individuals at apparently low CVD risk. DESIGN: Prospective population-based study of 19,067 men and women, aged 41-80 years with no previous heart disease or stroke at baseline assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure CVD mortality. RESULTS: A total of 791 CVD deaths were recorded up to June 2009 during a median 11.3 person-years of follow-up. Limited perceived mastery over life circumstances was associated with an increased risk of CVD mortality, independently of biological, lifestyle, and socioeconomic risk factors (hazard ratio 1.11 per SD decrease in mastery score, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.21). This association was more pronounced among those participants apparently at low CVD risk (p = .01 for test of interaction according to the number of CVD risk factors at baseline). CONCLUSIONS: Limited perceived control over life circumstances is associated with an increased risk of CVD mortality, independently of classical cardiovascular risk factors, and particularly among those at apparently low risk. Future attention should be given to this potentially modifiable personal characteristic, through the design of preliminary intervention studies, to reduce cardiovascular risk.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0019432

Cites

57 of 57 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
Surtees, P. G., Wainwright, N. W. J., Luben, R., Wareham, N. J., Bingham, S. A., & Khaw, K.-T.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Addenbrooke's Hospital (GB)
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2010-07
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
412-420
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W2059131639
Cited by
64
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council (G9502233; G0300128)
  • Cancer Research UK (C865/A2883)
  • European Union
  • Stroke Association
  • British Heart Foundation
  • Department of Health
  • Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Keywords
perceived mastery, cardiovascular mortality, low cardiovascular risk, negative emotion regulation, stress appraisal, cardiovascular risk factors, sex differences
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cause of Death, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Risk, Risk Factors, Self Concept, Socioeconomic Factors, Proportional Hazards Models, Stroke

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