Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38252390›Full record

ArticleJournal of religion and health2024

Military Perspectives on the Provision of Spiritual Care in the Australian Defence Force: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Megan C Best, Katie Tunks Leach, Mark Layson, Lindsay B Carey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of religion and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Megan C BestInstitute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia, PO Box 944, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia. megan.best@nd.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1570-8872
Katie Tunks LeachUniversity of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5195-4782
Mark LaysonSt Marks National Theological Centre, Charles Sturt University, Canberra, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8310-1303
Lindsay B CareyInstitute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia, PO Box 944, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1120-7798

Funding

Defence Force Anglican Chaplaincy Incorporated 000
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A module to explore perspectives on chaplaincy services was included in an online enterprise survey randomly distributed to members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) during 2021. Up to eight questions were answered by 2783 active military personnel relating to their perception of chaplain activities and the impact of chaplaincy services. Of those military participants answering the question on religious status (n = 1116), a total of 71.6% (n = 799) of respondents identified as non-religious while 28.4% (n = 317) identified as holding a religious affiliation. Approximately 44.2% (n = 1230) of participants had sought support from a chaplain, of which 85.3% (n = 1049) found chaplaincy care to be satisfactory or very satisfactory. While the data suggest there is a lack of clarity around the multiple roles undertaken by chaplaincy, nevertheless respondents were just as likely to prefer chaplains for personal support (24.0%), as they were to seek help from non-chaplaincy personnel such as a non-ADF counsellor (23.2%), their workplace supervisor (23.1%) or a psychologist (21.8%). This evidence affirms that the spiritual care provided by military chaplaincy remains one of several preferred choices and thus a valued part of the holistic care provided by the ADF to support the health and wellbeing of its members.

Indexed as

Chaplaincy Service, HospitalMilitary PersonnelPastoral CareSpiritual TherapiesAustraliaClergyCross-Sectional StudiesHumansSpiritualityBarriersChaplainsMilitaryReligionSpirituality

Identifiers

PMID38252390
PMCPMC10861639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.