ArticleJournal of religion and health2026
Arts and Humanities Citation Index for Research Evaluation in the Field of Religion: Unusual Findings and Suggestions.
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
The Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) is widely used for research evaluation, including in the field of Religion. However, apart from merely indexing research output published in journals, it is still unclear what other flaws exist when using this authoritative database to evaluate religion-related studies. Through a comprehensive analysis of the A&HCI data from a full 50-year period and the most recent 10-year period, we uncover a series of unusual findings in the field of Religion, including stagnation in the number of indexed records, absence of the author's address information, anomalies of the main contributing countries/regions, and over-concentration of preferred journals. We discuss the challenges posed by these unusual findings to the evaluation of religion-related studies using the A&HCI database. This study concludes with suggestions to the relevant stakeholders to address these issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41484526What 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.