FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2094767810> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2094767810 endingPage "281" @default.
• W2094767810 startingPage "280" @default.
• W2094767810 abstract "Since the landmark studies of the late 60s and early 70s, we as a field have tried to find the key psychosocial predictors of poorer cardiovascular outcomes. In the mid-90s, a new construct, type-D personality, was found to have significant predictive ability for mortality in patients with coronary heart disease [1]. This has led to a constant stream of original studies and reviews exploring the potential role of type-D personality in the progression of heart disease. Of particular note, there has been a recent spate of systematic reviews [2–4] on the topic. In spite of this, the review by Grande et al. [5] truly provides an extension, not only through the inclusion of new studies, but also in its conceptualisation. Grande and colleagues have taken a rigorous and refined approach to assessing the impact of type-D personality on cardiac outcomes, which has created a number of interesting talking points. One particularly interesting point rightly highlighted by the authors is the contrasting data on patients with coronary artery disease vs. those with congestive heart failure (CHF). They raise the issue of whether this difference is driven by a true lack of prognostic effects in CHF patients or if this just reflects the increased sample size in the newer larger CHF studies and tend, with good reason, to lean more on the side of an actual prognostic difference. There is, however, an alternative possibility which revolves around the appropriate cut point for different populations. The type-D scale, which was used in 11 out of the 12 studies, was developed in a specific population, a Flemish/Dutch coronary artery disease population [6], and whilst there has been some good work to establish the factor structure invariance of the scale across different languages and populations [7], the same cannot be said for the cut point of 10. One of the main underpinnings of good psychometrics is that all aspects of a scale or questionnaire are validated when used in new populations, i.e. any population that differs substantially from the original cohort the scale/ questionnaire was developed in. Following this, it could be that type-D personality may be predictive of outcomes in CHF populations, but not with a cut point of 10. Further complicating this issue is the way in which the original cut point was generated. The figure of 10 is derived from a median split of negative affect and social inhibition in the original validation study. We think all of us would argue that this is not the optimal way of defining a diagnostic level, though, as highlighted by Grande and colleagues, what is the comparator or ‘reference standard’ [8] needed to determine the classification accuracy of the type-D cut point? Suffice to say, there needs to bemore work around the optimisation of a type-D cut point, or if no valid measure can be reliably generated, then only continuous data should be used in the future. Another interesting finding from this meta-analysis was that no matter what way the data were analysed, the pooled odds ratio or hazard ratio (HR) ranged from 1.5 to 2.3, though for those sub-analyses with less studies, the increased confidence intervals suggested non-significance. At this point in time, it S. L. Bacon :G. Moullec Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, Montreal, Quebec H4J 1C5, Canada" @default.
• W2094767810 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2094767810 creator A5046872842 @default.
• W2094767810 creator A5051621018 @default.
• W2094767810 date "2012-03-20" @default.
• W2094767810 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W2094767810 title "Type-D Personality and Heart Disease: It Might Be ‘One Small Step’, but It Is Still Moving Forward: A Comment on Grande et al." @default.
• W2094767810 cites W1985832960 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2001417587 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2012259210 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2019050682 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2025476945 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2025609239 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2058225747 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2094047237 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2094064862 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2151333147 @default.
• W2094767810 cites W2152000087 @default.
• W2094767810 doi "https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9357-6" @default.
• W2094767810 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22430836" @default.
• W2094767810 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2094767810 type Work @default.
• W2094767810 sameAs 2094767810 @default.
• W2094767810 citedByCount "9" @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102012 @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102013 @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102014 @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102015 @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102016 @default.
• W2094767810 countsByYear W20947678102021 @default.
• W2094767810 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2094767810 hasAuthorship W2094767810A5046872842 @default.
• W2094767810 hasAuthorship W2094767810A5051621018 @default.
• W2094767810 hasBestOaLocation W20947678101 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C138816342 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C155164915 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C187288502 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C203440823 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C70410870 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C138816342 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C155164915 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C15744967 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C159110408 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C187288502 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C203440823 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C70410870 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C71924100 @default.
• W2094767810 hasConceptScore W2094767810C77805123 @default.
• W2094767810 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2094767810 hasLocation W20947678101 @default.
• W2094767810 hasLocation W20947678102 @default.
• W2094767810 hasOpenAccess W2094767810 @default.
• W2094767810 hasPrimaryLocation W20947678101 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2012418010 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2094713238 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2295489965 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2469255255 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W2960550857 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W3028618064 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W3032678743 @default.
• W2094767810 hasRelatedWork W3134741065 @default.
• W2094767810 hasVolume "43" @default.
• W2094767810 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2094767810 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2094767810 magId "2094767810" @default.
• W2094767810 workType "article" @default.