Enhancing training in spiritual and religious competencies in mental health graduate education: Evaluation of an integrated curricular approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite practice guidelines for multiculturally competent care, including spiritual/religious diversity, most mental health graduate training programs do not formally address spiritual/religious competencies. Thus, we enhanced the Spiritual Competency Training in Mental Health (SCT-MH) course curriculum to train graduate students in foundational attitudes, knowledge, and skills for addressing clients' spirituality and/or religion (S/R). The hybrid (online and in-person) SCT-MH course curriculum was integrated into existing required graduate clinical courses (replacing 15% of a course's curriculum) and taught to 309 students by 20 instructors in 20 different graduate training programs across counseling, psychology, and social work disciplines. Using a multiple baseline waitlist control design in which students served as their own controls, students completed validated assessments at three timepoints evaluating their spiritual/religious competencies for understanding the intersection between S/R and mental health. We also collected qualitative data from the students to evaluate acceptability of the content and format of the training program. Students' scores on all seven measures of spiritual/religious competencies had a statistically significant positive increase after engaging with the SCT-MH curriculum compared to the control period. At the end of the course, 97% of the students envisioned using spiritually integrated therapy techniques with their clients at least some of the time, 92% or more rated the materials as helpful and relevant, and 96% were satisfied with the training modules. Results demonstrate that dedicating a small (i.e., 6 hours of class time; 10 hours outside class time) but intentional amount of course time to teaching spiritual/religious competencies increases students' attitudes, knowledge, and skills for attending to clients' S/R in clinical practice. The SCT-MH hybrid course content is freely available to all graduate programs on our website. https://www.spiritualandreligiouscompetenciesproject.com/resources/sct-mh.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".