Religion/spirituality and health in the context of cancer: Cross‐domain integration, unresolved issues, and future directions

Park, Crystal L.; Sherman, Allen C.; Jim, Heather; Salsman, John M.

doi:10.1002/cncr.29351

Cited by 42 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent meta-analyses of 1341 effects drawn from over 44,000 patients with cancer demonstrated an overall positive relationship between RS and self-reported measures of health outcomes (Park et al, 2015) but the strength of that relationship varied as a function of both the RS dimension and the physical (Jim et al, 2015), mental (Salsman et al, 2015), and social (Sherman et al, 2015) outcomes assessed. The strongest relationships were found between affective dimensions of RS (e.g., sense of meaning, purpose, or connection to a source larger than oneself) and mental health outcomes, whereas behavioral RS constructs (e.g., service attendance, prayer and meditation) showed few significant associations with health, except for a modest positive relationship with social health outcomes.…”

Section: Rs and Health Research: Current Findings And Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, further study of the two factor structure indicated that the meaning/peace component was too closely related to anxiety and that separating this instrument into three domains–meaning, peace, and faith–provides more informative constructs and better psychometric properties (Peterman et al, 2014). In addition to moving away from a two factor model of the FACIT-Sp, care should be taken to avoid using the measure as a predictor of well-being outcomes—a common misuse which confounds predictor and outcome variables (Park et al, 2015). …”

Section: Future Directions Anticipated Barriers and Research Recommmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing our understanding of religion and spirituality in the context of behavioral medicine

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognizing and understanding the potentially powerful roles that religiousness and spirituality (RS) may serve in the prevention and amelioration of disease, as well as symptom management and health related quality of life, significantly enhances research and clinical efforts across many areas of behavioral medicine. This article examines the knowledge established to date and suggests advances that remain to be made. We begin with a brief summary of the current knowledge regarding RS as related to three exemplary health conditions: (a) cardiovascular disease; (b) cancer; and, (c) substance abuse. We then focus on particular concerns for future investigations, emphasizing conceptual issues, possible mediators and moderators of relationships or effects, and methodology. Our discussion is framed by a conceptual model that may serve to guide and organize future investigations. This model highlights a number of important issues regarding the study of links between RS and health: (a) RS comprise many diverse constructs, (b) the mechanisms through which RS may influence health outcomes are quite diverse, and (c) a range of different types of health and health relevant outcomes may be influenced by RS. The multidimensional nature of RS and the complexity of related associations with different types of health relevant outcomes present formidable challenges to empirical study in behavioral medicine. These issues are referred to throughout our review and we suggest several solutions to the presented challenges in our summary. We end with a presentation of barriers to be overcome, along with strategies for doing so, and concluding thoughts.

show abstract

Section: Rs and Health Research: Current Findings And Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Directions Anticipated Barriers and Research Recommmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing our understanding of religion and spirituality in the context of behavioral medicine

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…thirdly, the awareness on how religion and spirituality influence cancer adaptation is scarce. In this sense, there are still very few studies examining how different concepts of death, disease and transcendence influence cancer-coping in both, family and the patients [10] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenges of psycho-oncology research in developing countries: A non-equivalent process of growth

Castellano-Tejedor

2017

Adv Mod Oncol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation: Castellano-tejedor C. the challenges of psycho-oncology research in developing countries: a non-equivalent process of growth. adv mod oncol res 2017; 3(S1): [45][46] Psycho-oncology emerged only four decades ago. this discipline, as a subspecialty into the disease-specific domain of oncology, is focused on the psychological aspects of the treatment and management of patients with cancer. Today, this field contributes to the clinical care of patients and their families, to the training of staff in psychological management, and to collaborative research that ranges from the behavioral issues in cancer prevention to the management of psychiatric disorders and the psychosocial problems during the continuum of cancer illness, including survivorship and end-of-life care [1] . Despite the relatively short lifespan of psycho-oncology specialty, the extent of its clinical influence and the amount of research produced is enormous. the development of psycho-oncology has been closely related to the development of the medical practice of oncology. During the last decade, we have witnessed an unprecedented outburst of new treatment approaches for cancer and new lines of research have arisen. these progresses and cancer control research have helped to reduce cancer incidence, morbidity and mortality [2] . as a consequence, survivorship as the ultimate goal of oncology is not an exception anymore. now, this is a common expected outcome and cancer survivors are a growing population [3] . Besides, cancer is now considered as a chronic condition more than a death sentence. therefore, the focused is placed not strictly on survival, but in improving adaptation to the disease and the global health status in the aftermath of cancer [4] . Precisely, psycho-oncology research is aimed at examining long-term psychosocial effects of treatment, survival, health-related quality of life, adaptation to cancer and to a life free of treatment and the disease, among other aspects [1] . all these aforementioned issues constitute the basis of a growing body of knowledge and the foundations of this field. However, there are still several challenges to overcome. It is already known that, in psycho-oncology research, comparisons and generalizations are very difficult because of the variety of settings, sample populations, study designs, assessment tools, and operational definitions of constructs and variables studied. to these limitations, we must include resource availability differences depending on the country. In this sense, it is worthwhile to stress that approximately 70% of all cancer deaths occur in low-and middleincome countries [5] . that is to say, the ethnic minorities are overrepresented in cancer burden, yet underrepresented in research. Psycho-oncology (and oncology research, in general) has followed the guiding path of resources availability. that means that most scientific research in this area does not include unique aspects from developing countries. this represents a big limitation because practical models for designing m...

show abstract

“…Using this approach, the degree to which the overall relation between affective measures of R/S and mental health outcomes is inflated by spiritual well-being measures could be more clearly delineated. We also discussed this problem in our commentary [1]. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given space constraints, we could include only a limited number of sub-analyses and thus we chose to focus on providing a broad overview of the findings for R/S and mental health relationships as well as a more nuanced summary of these relationships as a function of type of R/S dimension, type of mental health outcome, and potential moderating variables. We acknowledged the need for greater attention to selection of psychometrically strong R/S measures in the accompanying commentary [1]. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply to the association between religion/spirituality and mental health in cancer

Salsman

Pustejovsky

Park

et al. 2016

Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Religion/spirituality and health in the context of cancer: Cross‐domain integration, unresolved issues, and future directions

Cited by 42 publications

References 35 publications

Advancing our understanding of religion and spirituality in the context of behavioral medicine

Advancing our understanding of religion and spirituality in the context of behavioral medicine

The challenges of psycho-oncology research in developing countries: A non-equivalent process of growth

Reply to the association between religion/spirituality and mental health in cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About