The Spiritual History Scale in Four Dimensions (SHS-4)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goals of this study were to develop a valid, reliable measure of lifetime religious and spiritual experience and to assess its value in explaining late-life health. Procedures included semi-structured interviews with Duke Aging Center volunteers (n = 30), followed by structured interviews of a stratified, random sample of subjects (n = 157) from the Established Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly at Duke University. Principal components analysis suggested four factors with favorable psychometrics. Health-impaired subjects reported a history of seeking/receiving divine aid (God Helped). At every level of impairment, Lifetime Religious Social Support and current religious attendance were positively correlated. Regardless of current attendance, subjects who reported higher Lifetime Religious Social Support received more instrumental social support. Healthy behaviors were associated with both God Helped and Lifetime Religious Social Support. Cost of Religiousness predicted depressive symptoms and impaired social support. Family History of Religiousness was unrelated to late-life health. Evaluation of the Spiritual History Scale in Four Dimensions (SHS-4) across geographical settings, cultural subgroups, age cohorts, and clinical samples is warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".