Cited by 177Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPalliative and Oncologic CarePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Oncologist Assisted Spiritual Intervention Study (OASIS): Patient Acceptability and Initial Evidence of Effects

Kristeller, Jean L., Rhodes, Mark, Cripe, Larry D., Sheets, Virgil·2005·The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine

Abstract

Purpose Individuals with serious illness often desire to discuss spiritual concerns with their physician, yet substantial barriers exist to doing so, including limited evidence of value. This study evaluated acceptability, impact on satisfaction with care and on quality of life (QOL) of a brief (5-7 minute) semi-structured exploration of spiritual/religious concerns. Patients and methods 118 consecutive patients of four oncologist-hematologists (95% recruitment; 55.1% female, 91.5% Caucasian, 81.3% Christian) with mixed diagnoses, duration (51.7% diagnosed within 2 years) and prognosis (54.2% in active treatment) were alternately assigned to receive the intervention or usual care during an office visit. Assessment occurred just prior to the visit, immediately after, and after 3 weeks. Measures included the FACT-G QOL and FACIT-Sp (Spiritual Well-Being) Scales; BSI Depression Scale; the PCAS Interpersonal and Communication scales; and ratings of acceptability. Results Oncologists rated themselves as comfortable during the inquiry with 85% of patients. Of patients, 76% felt the inquiry was "somewhat" to "very" useful. At 3 weeks, the intervention group had greater reductions in depressive symptoms (F= 7.57,p Conclusions This study supports the acceptability of a semi-structured inquiry into spiritual concerns related to coping with cancer; furthermore, the inquiry appears to have a positive impact on perception of care and well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2190/8ae4-f01c-60m0-85c8

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
Kristeller, J. L., Rhodes, M., Cripe, L. D., & Sheets, V.
Affiliations
  • Indiana State University (US)
  • Private Practice, Amarillo, Texas
  • Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Kristeller, Jean L.
Venue
The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine
Published
2005-12
Volume
35
Issue
4
Pages
329-347
ISSN
  • 0033-278X (ISSN-L)
  • 0091-2174
  • 1541-3527
OpenAlex
W2137450273
Cited by
177
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
spiritual intervention, spiritual well-being, religious concerns, patient acceptability, quality of life, depressive symptoms, physician-patient relationship, coping with cancer, hematologic patients
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depression, Female, Holistic Health, Humans, Male, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Physician-Patient Relations, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Program Development, Treatment Outcome, 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