↓ Skip to main content

The evaluation of religious and spirituality-based therapy compared to standard treatment in mental health care: A multi-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Psychotherapy Research, August 2023
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The evaluation of religious and spirituality-based therapy compared to standard treatment in mental health care: A multi-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
Psychotherapy Research, August 2023
DOI 10.1080/10503307.2023.2241626
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annette J Bouwhuis-Van Keulen, Jurrijn Koelen, Liesbeth Eurelings-Bontekoe, Christien Hoekstra-Oomen, Gerrit Glas

Abstract

Psychotherapies are increasingly incorporating spiritual and religious systems of belief and practice, which aligns with recent developments toward person-centered treatments. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of a religion and spiritually-based (R/S) therapy to non-R/S treatments. A multi-level meta-analysis was conducted to compare randomized controlled studies of the efficacy between R/S-based and regular treatments in mental health care setting. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis, psychotherapeutic treatment, and explicitly religion/spirituality therapy. Outcome was assessed for symptoms and for functioning separately, and combined. We also examined several moderators, such as type of comparison, outcome domain, and diagnosis. Overall effect sizes obtained from 23 studies and 27 comparison groups indicated that a R/S treatment is moderately more efficacious compared to regular treatments at posttreatment (g = .52, p < .01) and at follow-up (g = .72, p < .01) (only available for symptoms). Results were similar for symptoms (g = .44, p < .01) and functioning (g = .62, p < .01). In patients with a strong religious and spiritual affiliation, treatments with a focus on religious and spiritual issues are more efficacious than non-R/S-based therapy. Limitations as well as future directions are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Student > Master 2 10%
Lecturer 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 25%
Unspecified 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Linguistics 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 08 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,658,391
of 25,448,590 outputs
Outputs from Psychotherapy Research
#51
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,657
of 355,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychotherapy Research
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,448,590 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 756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 355,510 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them