Why the study?
Hypertension is the most prevalent modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but the role of Big Five personality traits in predicting hypertension risk required examination.
Do Big Five personality traits predict the risk of sustained and incident hypertension in a Japanese cohort?
Do Big Five personality traits predict the risk of sustained and incident hypertension in a Japanese cohort?
Personality traits, specifically conscientiousness and openness, are significant predictors of hypertension risk, suggesting a role for psychological factors in personalized prevention strategies.
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are a leading cause of mortality worldwide, with hypertension being the most prevalent and modifiable risk factor. This study aims to examine the role of the Big Five personality traits in predicting hypertension risk in a Japanese cohort over a four-year period. Longitudinal data from the Human Information Database managed by NTT Data Institute of Management Consulting were analyzed. The final sample included 7,321 individuals (4,069 males, 3,252 females; mean age = 51.98, SD = 13.47). Personality traits were assessed using the Ten-Item Personality Inventory-Japanese (TIPI-J), and hypertension status was monitored annually from 2019 to 2022. A hierarchical multinomial logistic regression was employed to identify significant predictors of sustained and incident hypertension. Higher conscientiousness was associated with a lower risk of both sustained and incident hypertension, whereas greater openness was linked to an increased risk of sustained hypertension. In addition to personality traits, demographic factors such as age, gender, and income were significant predictors of hypertension risk. Personality traits, particularly conscientiousness and openness, play a crucial role in hypertension outcomes. These findings suggest the importance of personalized interventions that consider both psychological and demographic factors to improve hypertension prevention and management strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deng et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: