Dataset Information

Physicians' religious/spiritual characteristics and their behavior regarding religiosity and spirituality in clinical practice: A meta-analysis of individual participant data.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Religiosity and/or spirituality (R/S) of physicians have been reported to inform behavior regarding religiosity and spirituality in clinical practice (R/S-B). Our aim was to study this association.

Methods

Building upon a large international data pool of physician values we performed network and systematic literature searches using Google Scholar, Web of Science, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo. Measures for R/S and R/S-B were selected for comparability with existing research. We performed a two-stage IPDMA using R/S coefficients from sample-wise multiple regression analyses as summary measures. We controlled for age, gender, and medical specialty. An additional sub-analysis compared psychiatrists to non-psychiatrists.

Results

We found 11 eligible surveys from 8 countries (n = 3159). We found a positive association between R/S and R/S-B with an overall R/S coefficient of 0.65 (0.48-0.83). All samples revealed a positive association between R/S and R/S-B. Only 2 out of the 11 samples differed from the overall confidence interval. Psychiatrists had a higher degree of R/S-B, but associations with R/S did not differ compared to non-psychiatrists.

Conclusions

We confirmed a significant association between R/S and R/S-B in this study. Despite large cultural differences between samples, coefficients remained almost constant when controlling for confounders, indicating a cultural independent effect of R/S on R/S-B, which to our knowledge has not been documented before.Such interaction can constitute both facilitators and barriers for high quality health care and should be considered in all aspects of patient and relationship-centered medicine.

SUBMITTER: Korup AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8718206 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the attitudes, knowledge, and experiences of Brazilian resident physicians regarding religiosity/spirituality (R/S), factors associated with addressing this issue, and its influence on clinical practice.MethodsWe report results of the multicenter "Spirituality in Brazilian Medical Residents" (SBRAMER) study involving 7 Brazilian university centers. The Network for Research Spirituality and Health (NERSH) scale (collecting sociodemographic data, opinions about the R/S-health interface, and respondents' R/S characteristics) and the Duke Religion Index were self-administered. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine those factors associated with residents' opinions on spirituality in clinical practice.ResultsThe sample comprised 879 resident physicians (53.5% of total) from all years of residency with 71.6% from clinical specialties. In general, the residents considered themselves spiritual and religious, despite not regularly attending religious services. Most participants believed R/S had an important influence on patient health (75.2%) and that it was appropriate to discuss these beliefs in clinical encounters with patients (77.1%), although this was not done in routine clinical practice (14.4%). The main barriers to discussing R/S were maintaining professional neutrality (31.4%), concern about offending patients (29.1%), and insufficient time (26.2%). Factors including female gender, clinical specialty (e.g., internal medicine, family medicine, psychiatry) as opposed to surgical specialty (e.g., surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, orthopedics), having had formal training on R/S, and higher levels of R/S were associated with greater discussion of and more positive opinions about R/S.ConclusionBrazilian resident physicians held that religious and spiritual beliefs can influence health, and deemed it appropriate for physicians to discuss this issue. However, lack of training was one of the main obstacles to addressing R/S issues in clinical practice. Educators should draw on these data to conduct interventions and produce content on the subject in residency programs.

Project description:BackgroundThe goal of this study was to understand prospective cohort study Principal Investigators' (PIs') attitudes regarding the importance of religion and spirituality (R/S) on disease etiology in order to identify barriers and opportunities for greater inclusion of these domains in high-quality epidemiological research.MethodsOne-hour, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 PIs, who represent 24 different National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded prospective cohort studies in the U.S. Collectively, these PIs collect detailed health data on approximately 1.25 of every 100 adult Americans. Sample size was calculated to achieve thematic saturation.ResultsThe majority of PIs we interviewed viewed R/S as potentially important factors influencing disease etiology, particularly among minority communities that report higher levels of religiosity. Yet nearly all PIs interviewed felt there was not yet a compelling body of evidence elucidating R/S influences on health, and the potential mechanisms through which R/S may be operating to affect health outcomes. PIs identified 5 key areas that would need to be addressed before they would be persuaded to collect more R/S measures in their cohorts: (1) high-quality, prospective studies that include all appropriate covariates for the outcome under study; (2) studies that posit a plausible biological mechanism of effect; (3) well-validated R/S measures, collected in common across multiple cohorts; (4) the need to address bias against R/S research among investigators; and (5) NIH funding for R/S research.ConclusionsResults of this study provide a roadmap for future R/S research investigating the impact of R/S influences on disease etiology within the context of U.S. prospective cohort studies. Identifying significant R/S influences on health could inform novel interventions to improve population health. Given the higher levels of religiosity/spirituality among minority communities, R/S research may also provide new leverage points for reducing health disparities.