APPENDIX TABLE A2.

The association between UO, UP, and the individuals' self‐management in the conducted sensitivity analysis

	Regular self‐monitoring of body weight a	Wound checking a	Regular self‐monitoring of blood sugar a	Regular self‐monitoring of blood pressure a	Keeping a diabetes diary a	Having a diet plan a	Sum‐score b
	OR [95% CI]	OR [95% CI]	OR [95% CI]	OR [95% CI]	OR [95% CI]	OR [95% CI]	β [95% CI]
(1) No MI history & < 75 years of age
UO	0.99 [0.38; 2.57]	2.07 [0.77; 5.60]	0.85 [0.24; 2.89]	0.82 [0.31; 2.14]	1.12 [0.32; 3.75]	0.38 [0.04; 2.54]	0.28 [−0.43; 0.99]
UP	1.22 [0.55; 2.74]	1.19 [0.53; 2.67]	1.33 [0.52; 3.43]	1.84 [0.83; 4.16]	1.97 [0.70; 5.65]	2.26 [0.52; 10.65]	0.50 [−0.10; 1.09]
(2) Estimated mean risk calculated based on age and sex
UO	0.97 [0.47; 2.02]	0.58 [0.27; 1.24]	1.21 [0.51; 2.86]	0.98 [0.46; 2.06]	0.92 [0.35; 2.40]	0.74 [0.20; 2.64]	−0.09 [−0.63; 0.45]
UP	0.47 [0.23; 0.96]	1.18 [0.57; 2.42]	0.52 [0.22; 1.19]	1.08 [0.53; 2.23]	0.40 [0.15; 1.00]	2.68 [0.84; 8.39]	−0.39 [−0.94; 0.16]
(3) Specific cut‐offs
UO	0.86 [0.26; 2.73]	1.25 [0.38; 4.34]	0.66 [0.16; 2.67]	1.30 [0.40; 4.25]	0.93 [0.22; 3.63]	0.90 [0.11; 4.93]	−0.10 [−0.97; 0.78]
UP	0.71 [0.34; 1.45]	1.55 [0.74; 3.31]	1.47 [0.62; 3.44]	1.07 [0.51; 2.23]	0.88 [0.35; 2.11]	5.73 [1.86; 17.50]	0.12 [−0.43; 0.67]
(4) Sensitive cut‐offs
UO	1.01 [0.51; 1.99]	1.25 [0.60; 2.58]	1.36 [0.58; 3.23]	0.98 [0.49; 1.96]	0.74 [0.31; 1.75]	0.49 [0.13; 1.77]	0.34 [−0.19; 0.87]
UP	0.87 [0.44; 1.72]	2.03 [1.03; 4.04]	2.04 [0.91; 4.63]	1.28 [0.64; 2.53]	0.92 [0.39; 2.16]	0.67 [0.20; 2.28]	0.37 [−0.14; 0.87]
(5) No exclusion of individuals based on their calculated relative risk category
UO	0.61 [0.35; 1.07]	0.91 [0.51; 1.60]	1.07 [0.56; 2.04]	0.75 [0.43; 1.32]	0.96 [0.48; 1.88]	0.81 [0.31; 2.05]	−0.20 [−0.61; 0.22]
UP	0.72 [0.48; 1.07]	1.19 [0.69; 2.06]	1.44 [0.76; 2.75]	1.01 [0.59; 1.75]	1.52 [0.79; 2.95	2.15 [0.85; 5.43]	0.07 [−0.34; 0.47]
(6) No exclusion of individuals based on their calculated relative risk category
UO	0.67 [0.45; 1.01]	0.82 [0.55; 1.22]	1.25 [0.83; 1.90]	0.86 [0.57; 1.27]	0.96 [0.61; 1.50]	0.88 [0.43; 1.76]	−0.22 [−0.55; 0.10]
UP	0.98 [0.65; 1.48]	1.23 [0.81; 1.87]	0.94 [0.60; 1.45]	0.98 [0.64; 1.48]	1.23 [0.78; 1.94]	1.42 [0.68; 2.88]	0.06 [−0.29; 0.40]

Note: Sensitivity analysis (1) to (5) were adjusted for self‐view, age, sex, BMI, blood pressure treatment status, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, education, participation in a diabetes education program, treatment with insulin, and history of MI. Sensitivity analysis (6) was only adjusted for self‐view. In sensitivity analyses (1) to (4), where UO was the predictor of interest, we included individuals with an average or comparatively high Framingham risk. In sensitivity analyses (1) to (4), where UP was the predictor of interest, we included individuals with an average or comparatively low Framingham risk. Sensitivity analysis (5) and (6) included all participants.

Abbreviations: UO, unrealistic comparative optimism; UP, unrealistic comparative pessimism.

^aBinary logistic regression analysis.

^bLinear regression analysis.