Five-factor personality traits and functional somatic disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 12.2 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102529

Thomas Tandrup Lamm , Victoria Von Schrottenberg , Anneline Rauch , Bo Bach , Heidi Frølund Pedersen , Mette Trøllund Rask , Eva Ørnbøl , Kaare Bro Wellnitz , Lisbeth Frostholm

{"title":"Five-factor personality traits and functional somatic disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Thomas Tandrup Lamm , Victoria Von Schrottenberg , Anneline Rauch , Bo Bach , Heidi Frølund Pedersen , Mette Trøllund Rask , Eva Ørnbøl , Kaare Bro Wellnitz , Lisbeth Frostholm","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Functional Somatic Disorders (FSD) is an umbrella term for various conditions characterized by persistent and troublesome physical symptoms, that are not better explained by other psychiatric or somatic conditions. Personality traits may play a crucial role in FSD, but the link is not fully understood. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis examines the relationship between the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality traits and FSD.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The review was based on the PRISMA statement, and drew data from systematic searches in PsycInfo, PubMed, and Embase. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to include eligible FSD groups and control groups and to assess FFM traits. Data were analyzed using random effects models. Sub-group and sensitivity analyses as well as meta-regression were used to explore the heterogeneity and robustness of findings.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total 6841 records were screened and 52 included. FSD cases scored higher on neuroticism (<em>k</em> = 46, Hedge's <em>g</em> = 0.72, [95 % CI, 0.61: 0.83]) and lower on extraversion (<em>k</em> = 31, <em>g</em> = −0.41, [−0.55:-0.28]) and agreeableness (<em>k</em> = 15, <em>g</em> = −0.22, [−0.36:-0.09]) than healthy/unspecified controls. FSD cases scored higher on neuroticism (<em>k</em> = 9, <em>g</em> = 0.26 [0.08:0.44]) and agreeableness (<em>k</em> = 4, <em>g</em> = 0.43 [0.28:0.59]) than somatic controls, but did not differ on extraversion (<em>k</em> = 6, <em>g</em> = −0.17 [−0.45:0.11]). No significant differences were found for conscientiousness and openness. For psychiatric controls, meta-analysis was only possible for neuroticism (<em>k</em> = 3,= −0.61, [−1.98:0.77]). Findings displayed significant heterogeneity but no publication bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This review reveals significant associations between FFM traits and FSD, providing insight into the etiology, classification, and management of FSD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"115 ","pages":"Article 102529"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824001508","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Functional Somatic Disorders (FSD) is an umbrella term for various conditions characterized by persistent and troublesome physical symptoms, that are not better explained by other psychiatric or somatic conditions. Personality traits may play a crucial role in FSD, but the link is not fully understood. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis examines the relationship between the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality traits and FSD.

Methods

The review was based on the PRISMA statement, and drew data from systematic searches in PsycInfo, PubMed, and Embase. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to include eligible FSD groups and control groups and to assess FFM traits. Data were analyzed using random effects models. Sub-group and sensitivity analyses as well as meta-regression were used to explore the heterogeneity and robustness of findings.

Results

In total 6841 records were screened and 52 included. FSD cases scored higher on neuroticism (k = 46, Hedge's g = 0.72, [95 % CI, 0.61: 0.83]) and lower on extraversion (k = 31, g = −0.41, [−0.55:-0.28]) and agreeableness (k = 15, g = −0.22, [−0.36:-0.09]) than healthy/unspecified controls. FSD cases scored higher on neuroticism (k = 9, g = 0.26 [0.08:0.44]) and agreeableness (k = 4, g = 0.43 [0.28:0.59]) than somatic controls, but did not differ on extraversion (k = 6, g = −0.17 [−0.45:0.11]). No significant differences were found for conscientiousness and openness. For psychiatric controls, meta-analysis was only possible for neuroticism (k = 3,= −0.61, [−1.98:0.77]). Findings displayed significant heterogeneity but no publication bias.

Conclusions

This review reveals significant associations between FFM traits and FSD, providing insight into the etiology, classification, and management of FSD.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

五因素人格特质与功能性躯体障碍：系统回顾与元分析

功能性躯体疾病（FSD）是一个总称，涵盖了以持续和麻烦的身体症状为特征的各种疾病，这些症状不能用其他精神或躯体疾病更好地解释。性格特征可能在FSD中起着至关重要的作用，但两者之间的联系尚不完全清楚。本研究对人格特质的五因素模型（FFM）与FSD之间的关系进行了系统回顾和meta分析。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

23.10

自引率

1.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.