CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 90Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyCancer survivorship and careWorkplace Spirituality and Leadership

The relationship between religious/spiritual factors and perceived growth following a diagnosis of breast cancer

Gall, Terry Lynn, Charbonneau, Claire, Florack, Peggy·2011·Psychology & Health
DOI 10.1080/08870440903411013
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study investigates the role of religious salience, God image and religious coping in relation to perceived growth following a diagnosis of breast cancer. Eighty-seven breast cancer patients were followed from pre-diagnosis up to 24 months post-surgery. The findings of this study provided limited support for the role of positive aspects of spirituality in relation to perceived growth. Religious involvement at pre-diagnosis was predictive of less growth at 24 months post-surgery while a positive image of God had no association with growth. While some forms of positive religious coping demonstrated positive associations, others evidenced no relationship or negative relationships with growth. Negative aspects of spirituality were more consistently related to growth with the nature of the association again depending on the type of negative spirituality being assessed. For example, passive deferral coping was related to less growth while spiritual discontent coping was related to greater growth across time. Such findings underscore the need to attend to negative aspects of spirituality from early on in the process of cancer adjustment as such expressions may have implications for women's ability to develop and maintain a positive perspective in their coping over the long-term.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08870440903411013

Cites

68 of 68 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?

  • Positive religious coping (PRC) is much more prevalent than negative religious coping (NRC) but has shown mixed relationships with various types of psychological well-being in cancer patients.

    “PRC is much more prevalent than NRC (Hebert et al., 2009) but has shown mixed relationships with various types of psychological well-being in cancer patients (Gall et al., 2011).”

    From Advancing our understanding of religion and spirituality in the context of behavioral medicine (2017) · cites this paper as Gall et al., 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gall, T. L., Charbonneau, C., & Florack, P.
Affiliations
  • Saint Paul University (CA)
  • Ottawa Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Gall, Terry Lynn
ORCID
Gall, Terry Lynn
Venue
Psychology & Health
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-03-22
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
287-305
ISSN
  • 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-8321
DOI
10.1080/08870440903411013
OpenAlex
W2027211741
Cited by
90
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
Keywords
breast cancer, spirituality, religious coping, image of God, religious salience, religious involvement, women
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Aged, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Religion and Medicine, 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