Domains of spirituality and their associations with positive mental health: a study of adolescents in Canada, England and Scotland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spirituality is a concept with ancient roots yet contemporary relevance to mental health. Its assessment in populations of young people, however, remains an immense challenge. Efforts to perform such assessments typically involve use of unidimensional scales incorporating items related to four domains (connections to "self", "others", "nature", and the "transcendent"). For adolescents, it remains unclear whether these domains equally influence mental health, or if one domain is particularly important. Here we analyzed reports from adolescents who participated in the 2014 Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study conducted in Canada (n = 21,173), England (n = 4339) and Scotland (n = 5603). Reports of positive mental health were modelled as a function of ordinal scores describing each spiritual health domain, controlling for age, the other domains, and potential confounders. Subsequent analyses focused on the centrality of connections to "self" in these relationships. We identified strong and consistent associations between positive mental health and higher scores for each of the four spiritual health domains. In fully adjusted models, these effects were diminished or changed direction for connections to "others", "nature", and the "transcendent", while the positive association with "connections to self" remained. While associations exist between each of the four domains of spiritual health and positive mental health, it appears that associations with connections to "others", "nature", and the "transcendent" are sometimes mediated by connections to "self". Implications for assessment, models and related interventions and health promotion strategies, based on the idea that inner connections may be central to the protective effects of spiritual health, are considered.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".