ArticleBMJ open2018
Role of personality traits in reporting the development of adverse drug reactions: a prospective cohort study of the Estonian general population.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of post-vaccination adverse reactions after influenza vaccine with mortality and cardiopulmonary outcomes in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease: the INVESTED trial.European journal of heart failure · 2023Trial
- Article
- Associations between the Willingness to Donate Samples to Biobanks and Selected Psychological Variables.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the role of the Five Factor Model (FFM) personality traits in reporting the development of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) when controlling for sociodemographic variables and health status.
designProspective cohort study.
settingThe Estonian Biobank of the Estonian Genome Centre, University of Tartu.
participants814 women and 543 men (mean age=47.9 years;
main outcome measureParticipants who did not report having any ADRs at baseline but who reported ADRs at the follow-up about 5.3 years later versus participants who did not report any ADRs at either time point. The reports of developing ADRs were predicted from the FFM personality traits after statistically controlling for sociodemographic variables (age, gender and education), baseline indicators of health status (number of diagnoses and medicines taken, body mass index and blood pressure), and the change in health status between the two measurements.
resultsThe results of a hierarchical binary logistic regression analysis showed that participants who reported the development of ADRs between the two measurements had higher levels of conscientiousness, were more likely to be women, were taking more medicines at baseline and had a higher increase in the number of medicines taken during the study period than participants who did not report any ADRs at either time point (all p values <0.05). Higher neuroticism (p=0.067) and a higher number of diagnosed diseases at baseline (p=0.053) also made marginal contributions to predicting the development of ADRs.
conclusionsThis study shows for the first time that higher levels of conscientiousness and neuroticism are associated with reporting the development of ADRs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.