Cited by 45Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyWorkplace Spirituality and LeadershipCardiac Health and Mental Health

Religiousness/spirituality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: Cultural integration for health research and intervention.

Masters, Kevin S., Hooker, Stephanie A.·2013·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Recently, behavioral scientists have developed greater interest in understanding the relations between religiousness and spirituality (R/S) and health. Our objectives were to (a) provide an overview of the R/S and health literature specific to cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer, (b) discuss the importance of religious culture considerations to behavioral medicine research, (c) suggest methodological changes to advance this research toward greater depth of understanding, and (d) begin discussion on clinically appropriate ways to integrate R/S into treatment. METHOD: Individual studies and meta-analyses on the relations of R/S with CVD and cancer were reviewed along with articles on the importance of culture to understanding R/S phenomena. RESULTS: Trends in the literature suggest that R/S predicts reductions in all-cause and CVD-related but not cancer mortality. R/S also shows relations with cardiovascular morbidity, and various dimensions of R/S show relations with cancer risk factors and well-being in cancer patients. Investigators have progressively studied more specific dimensions of R/S but have largely failed to consider them within religious cultural contexts. This context is essential for a deeper understanding of R/S and health relations and has profound methodological implications for future studies. CONCLUSIONS: R/S and health research is expanding; yet, the field needs more programmatic research and greater theoretical organization. We propose that consideration of R/S variables within their religious culture will provide structure for greater integrative understanding to move the field forward. This understanding is imperative if R/S is to be appropriately integrated into culturally sensitive clinical interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0030813

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 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?

  • Masters and Hooker (2013) argued that approaching RS variables apart from their cultural underpinnings is not only limiting but likely to lead to erroneous conclusions.

    “Masters and Hooker (2013) argued that such an approach is not only limiting but likely to lead to erroneous conclusions, and offer examples to highlight this point.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Masters, K. S., & Hooker, S. A.
Affiliations
University of Colorado Denver (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2013
Volume
81
Issue
2
Pages
206-216
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W1988579502
Cited by
45
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5
FWCI
6.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
religiosity, spirituality, cardiovascular disease, cancer, religious culture, cultural integration, health behavior, cancer risk factors, mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, culturally sensitive interventions, behavioral medicine
MeSH terms
Behavioral Medicine, Cardiovascular Diseases, Culture, Humans, Neoplasms, Spirituality

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