BackgroundThe Contextualized Health Research Synthesis Program (CHRSP), developed in 2007 by the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research, produces contextualized knowledge syntheses for health-system decision makers. The program provides timely, relevant, and easy-to-understand scientific evidence; optimizes evidence uptake; and, most importantly, attunes research questions and evidence to the specific context in which knowledge users must apply the findings.MethodsAs an integrated knowledge translation (KT) method, CHRSP:Involves intensive partnerships with senior healthcare decision makers who propose priority research topics and participate on research teams;Considers local context both in framing the research question and in reporting the findings;Makes economical use of resources by utilizing a limited number of staff;Uses a combination of external and local experts; andWorks quickly by synthesizing high-level systematic review evidence rather than primary studies. Although it was developed in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the CHRSP methodology is adaptable to a variety of settings with distinctive features, such as those in rural, remote, and small-town locations.ResultsCHRSP has published 25 syntheses on priority topics chosen by the provincial healthcare system, including:Clinical and cost-effectiveness: telehealth, rural renal dialysis, point-of-care testing;Community-based health services: helping seniors age in place, supporting seniors with dementia, residential treatment centers for at-risk youth;Healthcare organization/service delivery: reducing acute-care length of stay, promoting flu vaccination among health workers, safe patient handling, age-friendly acute care; andHealth promotion: diabetes prevention, promoting healthy dietary habits. These studies have been used by decision makers to inform local policy and practice decisions.ConclusionsBy asking the health system to identify its own priorities and to participate directly in the research process, CHRSP fully integrates KT among researchers and knowledge users in healthcare in Newfoundland and Labrador. This high level of decision-maker buy-in has resulted in a corresponding level of uptake. CHRSP studies have directly informed a number of policy and practice directions, including the design of youth residential treatment centers, a provincial policy on single-use medical devices, and most recently, the opening of the province’s first Acute Care for the Elderly hospital unit.

The existing literature addressing Religion and Spirituality supports the idea that attending church is positively associated with health outcomes. However, within this literature there has been an impoverished effort to determine whether the Religiously Unaffiliated will report these positive relationships. Using representative data from Ontario (N = 3620), the relationships between Religious/Spiritual variables (Attendance, Prayer/Meditation, and Religiosity) and health outcomes (Happiness, Self-Rated Health, and Satisfaction with Life) were assessed. Results focused on three recurring trends: the Religiously Unaffiliated experienced attending church less positively than Christians; when compared at the highest level of Attendance, the Religiously Unaffiliated were less healthy than Christians; and when only considering the Religiously Unaffiliated, Religious/Spiritual variables were not significant and positive predictors of health outcomes. The discussion focused on the need to delineate between how Christians and the Religiously Unaffiliated experience Religious/Spiritual variables, and the need to stop over-generalizing the positive relationship between Religious/Spiritual variables and health.

Individuals self-reporting a diagnosis of ADD/ADHD were found to have a significantly higher likelihood of engaging in smoking and alcohol binge drinking, and were more likely to meet criteria for SUDs than individuals not reporting an ADD/ADHD diagnosis.

Nonreligion is often thought to be commensurate with nihilism or fatalism, resulting in the perception that the nonreligious have no source of meaning in life. While views to this effect have been advanced in various arenas, no empirical evaluation of such a view has been conducted. Using data from the 2008 American General Social Survey (N = ~1,200), we investigated whether atheists, the religiously unaffiliated, and persons raised religiously unaffiliated were more likely than theists, the religiously affiliated, and persons raised with a religious affiliation to report greater levels of fatalism, nihilism, and the perception that meaning in life is self-provided. Results suggested that these groups did not differ with regard to fatalism or nihilism. However, atheists and the religiously unaffiliated (but not persons raised in a religiously unaffiliated household) were more likely to indicate that meaning in life was endogenous-that is, self-produced. While atheists and the nonreligious differed from their counterparts on source of meaning in life, this was not associated with any "penalty" for overall existential meaning.