Hospital Social Work and Spirituality: Views of Medical Social Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is based on a study of 1,389 medical social workers in 108 hospitals across 12 countries, on their views on spirituality and spiritually sensitive interventions in hospital settings. Results of the logistic regression analyses and structural equation models showed that medical social workers from European countries, United States of America, Canada, and Australia, those had undergone spiritual training, and those who had higher self-reported spiritual experiences scale scores were more likely to have the view that spirituality in hospital settings is for facilitating integral healing and wellness of patients and were more likely to prefer spiritual packages of New Age movements as the form of spiritual program, understand spiritual assessment as assessing the patients' spiritual starting point, to then build on further interventions and were likely to attest the understanding of spiritual techniques as mindfulness techniques. Finally they were also likely to understand the spiritual goals of intervention in a holistic way, that is, as that of integral healing, growth of consciousness and promoting overall well-being of patients vis-à-vis only coping and coming to terms with health adversities. Results of the structural equation models also showed covariances between religion, spirituality training, and scores on the self-reported spiritual experiences scale, having thus a set of compounding effects on social workers' views on spiritual interventions in hospitals. The implications of the results for health care social work practice and curriculum are discussed.
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 | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".