The impact of a home‐based spirituality teaching programme: qualitative exploration of participants' experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Context: A growing body of research reports that spiritual well‐being plays a significant role in mental wellness. Findings from a completed randomized controlled trial (RCT) indicate that a home‐based, eight‐week spirituality teaching programme lowers mood disturbance and increases quality of life. In this qualitative exploration the authors set out to understand how participants perceived the programme's impact. Methods: This descriptive, qualitative exploration employed face‐to‐face, in‐depth interviews with 13 individuals from Calgary, Canada. Participants were self‐referred clients suffering from emotional distress and purposively sampled from the study population of the previously conducted RCT. Interviews consisted of open‐ended questions that focused on how the spirituality teaching programme may have affected mood. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was undertaken by three of the authors. Results: Clients described how their mood and life changed throughout and subsequent to the spirituality teaching programme. The following six thematic categories were identified: (1) expansion of spiritual beliefs; (2) changed life perspectives; (3) calmness/mental clarity; (4) relief of mood disorder symptoms; (5) improved relationships; (6) renewed physical energy. Interviewees perceived the first three themes, expanded spiritual beliefs, changed life perspective and calmness, as the core changes that led to improvements in interpersonal relationships, mental health and physical energy. Conclusion: The findings suggest that the programme used with these participants impacts on mood by expanding spiritual beliefs and by shifting perspectives of life situations, in terms of both oneself and others. Spiritual teachings and practices could be an innovative and valuable adjunct intervention to improve mood. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".