↓ Skip to main content

Spiritual Care in General Practice: Rushing in or Fearing to Tread? An Integrative Review of Qualitative Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Religion and Health, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
Spiritual Care in General Practice: Rushing in or Fearing to Tread? An Integrative Review of Qualitative Literature
Published in
Journal of Religion and Health, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10943-018-0581-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alistair Appleby, Philip Wilson, John Swinton

Abstract

Guidance for medical staff reminds employees of the responsibility to deliver spiritual care in its broadest sense, respecting the dignity, humanity, individuality and diversity of the people whose cultures, faiths and beliefs coexist in society. This is no small or simple task, and although GPs (family practitioners) have been encouraged to deliver spiritual care, we suggest this is proving to be challenging and needs further careful debate. This literature review critiques and analyses existing studies and points to four categories of attitude to spiritual care, and two related but distinct concepts of spirituality in use by GPs. Our aims were to search for, summarise and critique the qualitative literature regarding general practitioners' views on spirituality and their role in relation to spiritual care. An integrative review was made by a multidisciplinary team using a critical realism framework. We searched seven databases and completed thematic and matrix analyses of the qualitative literature. A number of good-quality studies exist and show that some but not all GPs are willing to offer spiritual care. Four patterns of attitude towards delivering spiritual care emerge from the studies which indicate different levels of engagement with spiritual care: embracing, pragmatic, guarded and rejecting. Further research is needed to identify whether these four views are fixed or fluid, whether training in spiritual care modifies these and whether they relate to patterns of care in practice, or patient outcomes. The authors suggest that some of the difference in viewpoint relate to the lack of clear philosophical framework. The authors suggest critical realism as having potential to facilitate interdisciplinary research and create clearer concepts of spiritual care for GPs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 12%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 40 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Psychology 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 40 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,593,364
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Religion and Health
#81
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,024
of 333,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Religion and Health
#2
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.