The Protective Effect of Religion/Spirituality on Mental Health and Mental Illness Across the Adult Lifespan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. Increasing positive mental health and decreasing mental illness is considered a major priority. Theories of aging suggest that older adults turn towards religion and spirituality (R/S), in efforts of increasing meaning and purpose in life, and assisting in coping with life’s adversities. The role of R/S was examined in experiencing positive mental health and psychological distress in adulthood. It was hypothesized that these relationships will be most salient in older Canadian adults (≥65 years old). Methods. The data used for this study was derived from the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey–Mental health component (CCHSMH), a national population health study. R/S was measured by asking participants how important R/S was in their daily lives and if they drew strength from R/S, where greater importance reflected high R/S. Participants with positive mental health were categorized as flourishers. Established cut-offs were used to categorize levels of psychological distress as moderate-high versus low. Multiple logistic regression models adjusted for known covariates were conducted in order to examine the effect of R/S on positive mental health and psychological distress (n=20,019). Due to the complex survey design of the CCHS-MH, survey weights were employed. Results. There was a significant R/S by age interaction for flourishing status (p
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".