Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39196443›Full record

ArticleJournal of religion and health2024

Religion, Spirituality and Health Research: Warning of Contaminated Scales.

Harold G Koenig, Lindsay B Carey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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 132 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
132citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

132 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Harold G KoenigDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. Harold.Koenig@duke.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2573-6121
Lindsay B CareySchool of Psychology & Public Health, College of Science, Health & Engineering La Trobe University, Victoria, 3086, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relationship between religiosity, spirituality and health has received increasing attention in the academic literature. Studies involving quantitative measurement of religiosity and/or spirituality (R/S) and health have reported many positive associations between these constructs. The quality of various measures, however, is very important in this field, given concerns that some measures of R/S have been contaminated with indicators of mental health. When this occurs, that is when R/S is defined and measured a priori, this subsequently guarantees a positive association between R/S and health (especially mental health). Such associations are called tautological, which involves correlating a construct with itself, thus producing associations that are uninterpretable and misleading. In this article, concerns about the measurement of R/S are discussed, examples of contaminated and potentially probelmatic measures of R/S are noted, and recommendations are made regarding uncontaminated measures of R/S that should be used in future studies of R/S and health.

Indexed as

SpiritualityHealth StatusHumansMental HealthReligion and PsychologyContaminated scalesMeasurementReligionScalesSpiritualityTautology

Identifiers

PMID39196443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.