RIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS REport alarming levels of professional and personal distress. Up to 60% of practicing physicians report symptoms of burnout, 1-4 defined as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization (treating patients as objects), and low sense of accomplishment. Physician burnout has been linked to poorer quality of care, including patient dissatisfaction, increased medical errors, and lawsuits and decreased ability to express empathy. 2,[5][6][7] Substance abuse, automobile accidents, stress-related health problems, and marital and family discord are among the personal consequences reported. 4,[8][9][10] Burnout can occur early in the medical educational process. Nearly half of all third-year medical students report burnout 2,11 and there are strong associations between medical student burnout and suicidal ideation. 12 The consequences of burnout among practicing physicians include not only poorer quality of life and lower quality of care but also a decline in the sta-For editorial comment see p 1338. CME available online at www.jamaarchivescme.com and questions on p 1374.Context Primary care physicians report high levels of distress, which is linked to burnout, attrition, and poorer quality of care. Programs to reduce burnout before it results in impairment are rare; data on these programs are scarce.Objective To determine whether an intensive educational program in mindfulness, communication, and self-awareness is associated with improvement in primary care physicians' well-being, psychological distress, burnout, and capacity for relating to patients. Design, Setting, and ParticipantsBefore-and-after study of 70 primary care physicians in Rochester, New York, in a continuing medical education (CME) course in 2007-2008. The course included mindfulness meditation, self-awareness exercises, narratives about meaningful clinical experiences, appreciative interviews, didactic material, and discussion. An 8-week intensive phase (2.5 h/wk, 7-hour retreat) was followed by a 10-month maintenance phase (2.5 h/mo). Main Outcome MeasuresMindfulness (2 subscales), burnout (3 subscales), empathy (3 subscales), psychosocial orientation, personality (5 factors), and mood (6 subscales) measured at baseline and at 2, 12, and 15 months. Results Over the course of the program and follow-up, participants demonstrated improvements in mindfulness (raw score, 45.2 to 54.1; raw score change [⌬], 8.

We review evidence for links between personality traits and longevity. We provide an overview of personality for health scientists, using the primary organizing framework used in the study of personality and longevity. We then review data on various aspects of personality linked to longevity. In general, there is good evidence that higher level of conscientiousness and lower levels of hostility and Type D or “distressed” personality are associated with greater longevity. Limited evidence suggests that extraversion, openness, perceived control, and low levels of emotional suppression may be associated with longer lifespan. Findings regarding neuroticism are mixed, supporting the notion that many component(s) of neuroticism detract from life expectancy, but some components at some levels may be healthy or protective. Overall, evidence suggests various personality traits are significant predictors of longevity and points to several promising directions for further study. We conclude by discussing the implications of these links for epidemiologic research and personalized medicine and lay out a translational research agenda for integrating the psychology of individual differences into public health and medicine.

We conducted secondary analyses to determine the relationship between longstanding personality traits and risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD) among 767 participants 72 years of age or older who were followed for more than 6 years. Personality was assessed with the NEO-FFI. We hypothesized that elevated Neuroticism, lower Openness, and lower Conscientiousness would be independently associated with risk of AD. Hypotheses were supported. The finding that AD risk is associated with elevated Neuroticism and lower Conscientiousness can be added to the accumulating literature documenting the pathogenic effects of these two traits. The link between lower Openness and AD risk is consistent with recent findings on cognitive activity and AD risk. Findings have implications for prevention research and for the conceptualization of the etiology of Alzheimer's Disease.

We describe two frameworks in which personality dimensions relevant to health, such as Conscientiousness, can be used to inform interventions designed to promote health aging. First, contemporary data and theory do not suggest that personality is “immutable”, but instead focus on questions of who changes, in what way, why, when, and how. In fact, the notion that personality could be changed was part and parcel of many schools of psychotherapy, which suggested that long term and meaningful change in symptoms could not be achieved without change in relevant aspects of personality. We review intervention research documenting change in personality. Based on an integrative view of personality as a complex system, we describe a “bottom-up” model of change in which interventions to change basic personality processes eventuate in changes at the trait level. A second framework leverages the descriptive and predictive power of personality to tailor individual risk prediction and treatment, as well as refine public health programs, to the relevant dispositional characteristics of the target population. These methods dovetail with and add a systematic and rigorous psychosocial dimension to the personalized medicine and patient-centeredness movements in medicine. In addition to improving health through earlier intervention and increased fit between treatments and persons, cost-effectiveness improvements can be realized by more accurate resource allocation. Numerous examples from the personality, health, and aging literature on Conscientiousness and other traits are provided throughout, and we conclude with a series of recommendations for research in these emerging areas.

The authors assessed the extent to which socioeconomic status (SES) and the personality factors termed the "big 5" (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness) represented confounded or independent risks for all-cause mortality over a 10-year follow-up in the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) cohort between 1995 and 2004. Adjusted for demographics, the 25th versus 75th percentile of SES was associated with an odds ratio of 1.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 1.83). Demographic-adjusted odds ratios for the 75th versus 25th percentile of neuroticism were 1.38 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.73) and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.84) for conscientiousness, the latter evaluated at high levels of agreeableness. Modest associations were observed between SES and the big 5. Adjusting each for the other revealed that personality explained roughly 20% of the SES gradient in mortality, while SES explained 8% of personality risk. Portions of SES and personality risk were explained by health behaviors, although some residual risk remained unexplained. Personality appears to explain some between-SES strata differences in mortality risk, as well as some individual risk heterogeneity within SES strata. Findings suggest that both sociostructural inequalities and individual disposition hold public health implications. Future research and prevention aimed at ameliorating SES health disparities may benefit from considering the risk clustering of social disadvantage and dispositional factors.