Cited by 95Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyInnovations in Medical EducationWorkplace Spirituality and Leadership

Current status of teaching on spirituality in UK medical schools

Neely, David, Minford, Eunice J·2008·Medical Education

Abstract

Objective To investigate the current status of teaching on spirituality in medicine in UK medical schools and to establish if and how medical schools are preparing future doctors to identify patients’ spiritual needs. Methods We carried out a national questionnaire survey using a 2‐part questionnaire. Section A contained questions relating to the quantity of teaching on spirituality and the topics covered. Section B contained questions relating to teaching on alternative health practices. Medical educators from each of the 32 medical schools in the UK were invited to participate. Results A response rate of 53% ( n = 17) was achieved. A total of 59% ( n = 10) of respondents stated that there is teaching on spirituality in medicine in their curricula. On extrapolation, at least 31% and a maximum of 78% of UK medical schools currently provide some form of teaching on spirituality. Of the respondents that teach spirituality, 50% ( n = 5) stated that their schools include compulsory teaching on spirituality in medicine, 80% ( n = 8) include optional components, and 88% stated that teaching on complementary and alternative medicine is included in the curriculum. Conclusions Although 59% ( n = 10) of respondent medical schools (the actual UK figure lies between 31% and 78%) currently provide some form of teaching on spirituality, there is significant room for improvement. There is little uniformity between medical schools with regard to content, form, amount or type of staff member delivering the teaching. It would be beneficial to introduce a standardised curriculum on spirituality across all UK medical schools.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02980.x

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • R/S beliefs influence medical decisions among those with serious medical illness and especially among those with advanced cancer or HIV/AIDS.

    “Studies have shown that R/S beliefs influence medical decisions among those with serious medical illness [584, 585] and especially among those with advanced cancer [586] or HIV/AIDs [587].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Neely, D., & Minford, E. J.
Affiliations
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • Northern Health and Social Care Trust (GB)
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-01-22
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
176-182
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
OpenAlex
W1517897530
Cited by
95
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
Keywords
spirituality in medicine, medical curriculum, medical schools, spiritual needs of patients, complementary and alternative medicine, UK medical schools
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, United Kingdom, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Religion, Schools, Medical, Teaching, United States, 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