↓ Skip to main content

Religious coping methods predict depression and quality of life among end-stage renal disease patients undergoing hemodialysis: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 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
Religious coping methods predict depression and quality of life among end-stage renal disease patients undergoing hemodialysis: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Nephrology, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12882-017-0619-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulo Roberto Santos, José Roberto Frota Gomes Capote Júnior, José Renan Miranda Cavalcante Filho, Ticianne Pinto Ferreira, José Nilson Gadelha dos Santos Filho, Stênio da Silva Oliveira

Abstract

Poor quality of life (QOL) and a high prevalence of depression have been identified among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). We aimed to evaluate the associations between religious/spiritual (R/S) coping methods and both QOL and depression among ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). The sample included 161 ESRD patients over 18 years of age who had been undergoing HD for more than 3 months. R/S coping methods were assessed using the Religious Coping Questionnaire (RCOPE). The RCOPE generates scores (from 1 to 5) for positive and negative R/S coping methods. The higher the score, the more frequent the use of that coping method. Depression was evaluated using the 20-item version of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Scores on the CES-D range from 0 to 60. A cutoff of 18 was used to define depression. QOL was evaluated using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); this survey was used to generate scores for the eight dimensions of QOL, which can vary from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). We identified a depression prevalence of 27.3%. Positive R/S coping scores were higher among non-depressed than depressed patients (2.98 vs. 2.77; p = 0.037). Positive R/S coping scores were negatively correlated with depression scores (r = -0.200; p = 0.012) and were an independent protective factor for depression (OR = 0.13; CI 95% = 0.02-0.91; p = 0.039). Regarding QOL, a positive correlation was identified between positive R/S coping scores and scores related to general health (r = 0.171; p = 0.030) and vitality (r = 0.183; p = 0.019), and an inverse correlation was identified between negative R/S coping scores and scores in the social functioning (r = -0.191; p = 0.015) and mental health (r = -0.214; p = 0.006) dimensions. In addition, positive R/S coping scores were an independent predictor of higher scores in the bodily pain (β = 14.401; p = 0.048) and vitality (β = 12.580; p = 0.022) dimensions. In contrast, negative R/S coping scores independently predicted lower social functioning scores (β = -21.158; p = 0.017). Our results provide further evidence suggesting that R/S coping methods may be associated with QOL and depression among HD patients. In our opinion, the use of religious resources should be encouraged among HD patients, and psycho-spiritual interventions should be attempted to target religious struggles (negative R/S coping) in patients undergoing HD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 148 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Master 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Lecturer 9 6%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 58 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 36 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 11%
Psychology 16 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 62 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,555,330
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#1,894
of 2,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,820
of 316,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#52
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,493 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,926 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.