MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1623861187 · doi:10.1177/070674370905400503

Clinical Implications of Research on Religion, Spirituality, and Mental Health

2009· review· en· W1623861187 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marilyn Baetz, John Toews

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratitudeSpiritualityMental healthPsychological interventionForgivenessPsychologyRelation (database)Altruism (biology)Inclusion (mineral)PsychotherapistSocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relation between religion and (or) spirituality (RS), and mental health has shown generally positive associations; however, it is a complex and often emotion-laden field of study. We attempt to examine potential mechanisms that have been proposed as mediators for the RS and mental health relation. We also examine more philosophical areas including patient and physician opinions about inclusion of RS in patient care, and ethical issues that may arise. We review suggested guidelines for sensitive patient inquiry, and opportunities and challenges for education of psychiatrists and trainees. We also study practical ways to incorporate psychospiritual interventions into patient treatment, with specific reference to more common spiritual issues such as forgiveness, gratitude, and altruism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.231
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations130
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207