Effects of a Spirituality Promotion Program on Spirituality, Empathy and Stress in Nursing Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a spirituality promotion program on spirituality, empathy and stress in nursing students. Methods: This study used one-group pretest-posttest design. Participants were 162 nursing students who participated in the spirituality program at C University in Seoul between 2014 and 2016. The effects of this study were measured using the Spirituality Assessment Scale, Toronto Empathy Questionnaire and Perceived Stress Scale-10. Data were analyzed using paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Spirituality increased significantly (Z=-8.06, p<.001), empathy also increased significantly (Z=-2.05, p=.040) and perceived stress decreased significantly (t=5.59, p<.001) after the spirituality promotion program. Conclusion: Results show that the spirituality promotion program is an effective intervention to improve spirituality and empathy and reduce stress for nursing students. Therefore, this study proposes utilization of this spirituality promotion program with nursing students so that they can take care of themselves and develop the ability to perform holistic nursing care for patients.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".