Adherence To Prophylactic Swallowing Exercises in Head and Neck Cancer Patients (PRESTO-TRIAL) - the ROLE of Personality Characteristics.
Alice Vergauwen, Margot Baudelet, Leen Van den Steen and 6 others
PMID 41656428WHAT IT FOUND
Personality testing does not help predict which head and neck cancer patients will stick to swallowing exercises.
Only openness showed a tiny statistical link, but it is too small to be useful. Do not use personality profiles to decide who needs extra support.
Key findings
01Personality traits do not reliably predict adherence to prophylactic swallowing exercises in head and neck cancer patients.
02While openness to experience was statistically associated with higher adherence, the effect size was too small to be clinically relevant.
03The mode of therapy delivery (face-to-face vs. app vs. home) had a much stronger impact on adherence than any personality trait.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 116 of the 150 participants completed the personality questionnaire, introducing potential selection bias. The refusal rate for participation in the main trial was not recorded, so it is unknown if non-participants differed in personality. The authors note that people who are less 'open' may be less likely to participate in research, potentially underrepresenting that group. This is a secondary analysis, meaning the study was not originally powered to detect differences in personality traits as primary outcomes.
Declared interests
The study was funded by Kom op tegen Kanker (a cancer charity). No other conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that 'openness' is a useful clinical marker for predicting non-adherence. The statistical significance (p = 0.047) reflects a very weak association (Odds Ratio 1.06) that the authors themselves deem clinically irrelevant. Using this trait to guide patient care would be a mistake.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →