Cited by 26Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

Effects on Daily Spiritual Experiences of Religious Versus Conventional Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression

Koenig, Harold G., Pearce, Michelle J., Nelson, Bruce, Erkanli, Alaattin·2016·Journal of Religion and Health

Abstract

We compared religiously integrated cognitive behavioral therapy (RCBT) versus conventional CBT (CCBT) on increasing daily spiritual experiences (DSE) in major depressive disorder and chronic medical illness. A total of 132 participants aged 18-85 were randomized to either RCBT (n = 65) or CCBT (n = 67). Participants received ten 50-min sessions (primarily by telephone) over 12 weeks. DSE was assessed using the Daily Spiritual Experiences Scale (DSES). Mixed-effects growth curve models compared the effects of treatment group on trajectory of change in DSE. Baseline DSE and changes in DSE were examined as predictors of change in depressive symptoms. DSE increased significantly in both groups. RCBT tended to be more effective than CCBT with regard to increasing DSE (group by time interaction B = -1.80, SE = 1.32, t = -1.36, p = 0.18), especially in those with low religiosity (B = -4.26, SE = 2.27, t = -1.88, p = 0.07). Higher baseline DSE predicted a decrease in depressive symptoms (B = -0.09, SE = 0.04, t = -2.25, p = 0.025), independent of treatment group, and an increase in DSE with treatment correlated with a decrease in depressive symptoms (r = 0.29, p = 0.004). RCBT tends to be more effective than CCBT in increasing DSE, especially in persons with low religiosity. Higher baseline DSE and increases in DSE over time predict a faster resolution of depressive symptoms. Efforts to increase DSE, assessed by a measure such as the DSES, may help with the treatment of depression in…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10943-016-0270-3

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koenig, H. G., Pearce, M. J., Nelson, B., & Erkanli, A.
Affiliations
  • King Abdulaziz University (SA)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Adventist Health Glendale (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Koenig, Harold G.
Venue
Journal of Religion and Health
Published
2016-06-15
Volume
55
Issue
5
Pages
1763-1777
ISSN
  • 0022-4197 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6571
OpenAlex
W2426326859
Cited by
26
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Religion and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
John Templeton Foundation (21399)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, daily spiritual experiences, major depressive disorder, chronic disease, religiosity, depressive symptoms
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, North Carolina, South Carolina, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Spirituality, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review