Abstract
Background In order to facilitate better international and cross-cultural comparisons of health professionals (HPs) attitudes towards Religiosity and/or Spirituality (R/S) using individual participant data meta-analysis we updated the NERSH Data Pool. Methods We performed both a network search, a citation search and systematic literature searches to find new surveys. Results We found six new surveys (N=1,068), and the complete data pool ended up comprising 7,323 observations, including 4,070 females and 3,253 males. Most physicians (83%, N=3,700) believed that R/S had “some” influence on their patients’ health (CI95%) (81.8%–84.2%). Similarly, nurses (94%, N=1,020) shared such a belief (92.5%–95.5%). Across all samples 649 (16%; 14.9%–17.1%) physicians reported to have undergone formal R/S-training, compared with nurses where this was 264 (23%; 20.6%–25.4%). Conclusions Preliminary analysis indicates that HPs believe R/S to be important for patient health but lack formal R/S-training. Findings are discussed. We find the data pool suitable as a base for future cross-cultural comparisons using individual participant data meta-analysis.
Highlights
In order to facilitate better international and cross-cultural comparisons of health professionals (HPs) attitudes towards Religiosity and/or Spirituality (R/S) using individual participant data meta-analysis we updated the NERSH Data Pool
Preliminary analysis indicates that HPs believe R/S to be important for patient health but lack formal R/S-training
Data pool characteristics Using both network, citation and systematic literature searches we found six new survey samples based on the RSMPP or NERSH Questionnaire, which were added to the preexisting second version of the data pool, released as the NERSH Data Pool 3.0
Summary
In order to facilitate better international and cross-cultural comparisons of health professionals (HPs) attitudes towards Religiosity and/or Spirituality (R/S) using individual participant data meta-analysis we updated the NERSH Data Pool. Migration and population growth continually change the landscapes of cultures and faiths of the world’s countries creating new demands of healthcare systems that historically were developed to function within a single belief system (i.e. Christian Samaritanism etc.) This creates a need for a cross-cultural understanding and adds another challenging factor to this research field, requiring the highest levels of data quality and integrity to limit information bias and optimize statistical measurements. Comparing research findings have hitherto been difficult because of limited comparability of study designs and study outcome, as described by Garssen et al in their meta-analysis of R/S and mental health where they had to exclude 100 out of 181 eligible studies based on either methodological issues or incompatible study design or outcome measures These differences are known throughout this research field and have made data pooling less feasible. Opportunities are missed and statistical analyses of greater precision are left unexplored
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
