Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39240399›Full record

ReviewJournal of religion and health2024

Reviewing the use of the Brief Religious Coping Scale (Brief RCOPE) across diverse cultures and populations.

Nicola Saunders, Zoe Stephenson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Resilience Amid Racialized Emasculation: the Role of Religion for US Asian Men.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors.

Nicola SaundersUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Zoe StephensonUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. Z.M.E.Stephenson@bham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4716-1592

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To discern the religious coping methods which individuals employ when confronting life stressors, Pargament devised the Religious Coping Scale (RCOPE) in 1997. Subsequently, in 1998, Pargament et al. formulated an abbreviated iteration, the Brief RCOPE, intended for both research and practical application. The Brief RCOPE has been found to be a reliable and valid measure, however much of the research looking into the psychometric properties of this measure has been conducted in the United States. The aim of the current review was to draw together findings from studies which have investigated the reliability and/or validity of the measure amongst populations outside of the United States. A narrative approach was adopted, involving searches of academic databases using keywords and the application of specific inclusion criteria. It was found that the reliability of the measure has been demonstrated across a number of countries, and across a range of different religions. The measure has also demonstrated good convergent, construct and concurrent validity in diverse cultures. The findings from this review suggest that the Brief RCOPE can be used in a range of diverse religions and cultures. However, more research is needed to ascertain the accuracy of the measure with other religions and cultures and with those in minority groups.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalPsychometricsReligion and PsychologyHumansReproducibility of ResultsStress, PsychologicalSurveys and QuestionnairesBrief RCOPECopingLife stressorsPsychometric measureReliability

Identifiers

PMID39240399
PMCPMC11502535

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.