ArticleJournal of religion and health2026
Health Professionals' Approaches to Spirituality and Religiosity in Brazil: A Study Based on Item Response Theory.
Article in Journal of religion and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to estimate the proportion of Brazilian nurses, doctors, and psychologists who approach spirituality and religiosity (S/R) issues in professional practice. The study also explored these health professionals' willingness to interact with patients on issues related to S/R in their clinical practice using item response theory (IRT). From a nationwide cross-sectional web survey, demographic data and the opinions of doctors, nurses, and psychologists were collected regarding aspects related to S/R. For this study, the willingness of physicians to interact with patients regarding the S/R issues scale, developed by the Network for Research Spirituality and Health and translated into Brazilian Portuguese, was used. Information was adjusted according to the IRT. Of the 1095 participants, 335 (30.6%) were nurses, 433 (39.5%), doctors, and 327 (29.9%) were psychologists. The areas of activity with the most significant representation were primary healthcare (n = 292, 26.7%) and mental health (n = 296, 27.0%). A total of 76 (22.7%) nurses, 152 (35.1%) doctors, and 112 (34.3%) psychologists often or always asked about S/R in professional practice. There was a significant difference in the frequency of approach by nurses compared to doctors (p < 0.001) and psychologists (p = 0.001). Doctors were more willing to approach S/R, with a statistically significant difference between nurses (DM - 0.72, 95% CI BCa [- 1.38 to - 0.11]) and psychologists (DM 1.44, 95% CI BCa (0.76-2.11)]. This study should encourage a more comprehensive approach to human beings, contributing to more profound research in Brazil and worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39680288What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.