MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016682677 · doi:10.1192/bjb.2020.34

Religion and mental health: a narrative review with a focus on Muslims in English-speaking countries

2020· review· en· W3016682677 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Bulletin · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthAmbivalenceReligiosityChristianityMiddle Eastern Mental Health Issues & SyndromesNarrativePsychologyPsychiatryPublic healthSociologyMedicineMental health lawSocial psychologyHistoryNursingLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous commentators have noted a historic ambivalence between religion and psychiatry. However, a growing body of evidence indicates an association between mental health and various religious activities, both private and public. As such, there are growing calls for greater religious sensitivity among mental health clinicians, to help unlock the potentially healing aspects of religiosity. So far, most literature from English-speaking countries has focused on Christianity and mental health, with little attention paid to Muslim mental health. This is the fastest growing religion in English-speaking countries, and the mental health of Muslims in these countries is under-researched. As such, the present paper summarises new directions in the mental health and religion literature, with a focus on the mental health of Muslims in English-speaking countries.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it