The DOI matches its DataCite record; none of the 142 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Malliar Bellian Spiritual Healing from Trauma Scale: Preliminary Scale Development
Open accessAbstract
The unique role of spirituality in trauma recovery in helping professions has highlighted the necessity for developing measurements to assess the level of healing among people who have experienced traumatic events. However, there is no single dedicated scale to assess spiritual healing from trauma. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and test a new scale preliminarily, the Malliar Bellian Spiritual Healing from Trauma (MBSHT) scale, to assess the level of spiritual healing among adults who experienced traumatic events. Thus, this study aimed to improve the efficacy of healing and recovery methods within the helping professions. A Content Analysis of the relevant literature was conducted to generate scale items and to ensure they are empirically informed. Subject matter experts were consulted to establish face and content validity. Next, a pilot study was conducted to finetune the items and to test the initial psychometric properties of the proposed scale. Reliability was investigated using Classical Test Theory to determine the internal consistency of the scale. A preliminary Content Analysis revealed five components, namely, hope, mind, body, spirit, and meaning making, that collectively embody spiritual healing from trauma. In this context, an item pool of 50 items was created, and these five sub-constructs were tested as five subscales. The reliability analysis demonstrated good internal consistency for Hope (α = .84), Mind (α = .88), Body (α = .81), Spirit (α = .81), and Meaning-Making (α = .84). The overall scale (50 items) yielded an excellent internal consistency reliability (α =.96). The coefficient alphas based on the pilot study data showed stability and consistency, which is a fitting sign for conducting Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) of the constructs and dimensions with a larger sample for the full-scale psychometric analysis and validation in a future study. In the long run, spiritual approaches can be confidently advanced with clients experiencing trauma for desirable recovery and healing.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).
TL;DR
This dissertation develops and preliminarily tests the Malliar Bellian Spiritual Healing from Trauma (MBSHT) scale, a 50-item instrument with five subscales (Hope, Mind, Body, Spirit, Meaning-Making) derived from a content analysis of the spiritual healing and trauma literature. In a pilot sample of 26 trauma survivors, all five subscales and the overall scale showed good-to-excellent internal consistency, supporting progression to a larger validation study.
Key findings
- Content analysis of the literature yielded 37 concepts, patterns, and themes, clustered into five subconstructs: hope, mind, body, spirit, and meaning-making; an initial pool of 79 items was reduced to 50 (10 per subscale) after removing 29 redundant items.
- Pilot reliability (n = 26) was good for Hope (α = .84), Mind (α = .88), Body (α = .81), Spirit (α = .81), and Meaning-Making (α = .84); the overall 50-item scale yielded α = .96.
- Six of ten invited subject matter experts (60%) completed the review; based on their feedback 11 items were reworded, 3 removed for redundancy, and 3 new items added (e.g., "Some days, I find it hard to believe healing is possible").
- Sample characteristics: mean age 46 years (SD = 9.42), 66.7% female, 39% Black or African American and 36% White; 18.2% had received professional treatment for their trauma while 63.6% had not; 23 of 26 participants rated the scale length as "about the right amount" and 22 rated the items as clear.
Methods
- Cross-sectional scale development study following DeVellis and Thorpe's (2022) procedures across three steps: (A) content analysis/systematic literature review of databases including APA PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete, and Mental Measurements Yearbook (inclusion: 2015–2025, English, spiritual practice/intervention in helping professions); (B) subject matter expert review of the initial item pool for face and content validity; (C) pilot test.
- Pilot participants were adults 18+, English-reading, with self-reported trauma experienced at least one year prior, recruited via convenience sampling through four trauma-serving organizations in California, Indiana, Maryland, and Washington D.C.; data collected via Qualtrics. Seven ineligible respondents were removed by listwise deletion, leaving 26 analyzable cases (target had been 30).
- Analysis in IBM SPSS 31: descriptive statistics, item-level response distributions, Pearson correlation matrices for each subscale (interpreted with Cohen's benchmarks), and internal consistency via Cronbach's alpha under Classical Test Theory.
Limitations
- Stated by the paper: the exploratory nature of the preliminary development; self-report bias affecting sample representativeness; convenience sampling limiting generalizability; no additional qualitative interviews beyond SME review and pilot testing; only one reverse-scored item out of 50 and no steps taken to minimize response bias; heterogeneous trauma types rather than a single trauma type; possible cultural/contextual differences in how respondents understood the study; difficulty synthesizing many themes from a partly non-empirical literature; potential researcher bias in coding and synthesis; limited data validity and absent participant perspectives since this was not the primary data collection; use of only two theoretical frameworks; and no factorial validation yet.
- Evident from the text: the pilot sample (n = 26) is small and below the initially intended 30, and no exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis, test-retest reliability, or convergent/discriminant validity evidence was produced, so the factor structure and construct validity of the MBSHT remain untested.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
116 Own result · 89 Sources not found · 23 Own interpretation · 16 Own method · 13 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A preliminary Content Analysis revealed five components, namely, hope, mind, body, spirit, and meaning making, that collectively embody spiritual healing from trauma.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reliability analysis demonstrated good internal consistency for Hope (α = .84)”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Spirit (α = .81)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meaning-Making (α = .84)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The overall scale (50 items) yielded an excellent internal consistency reliability (α =.96).”
- Also stated in: § Reliability Assessment · plain
“The overall scale (50 items) yielded an excellent internal consistency reliability (α =.96).”
- Also stated in: § Summary of Key Findings · plain
“The overall scale (50 items) yielded an excellent internal consistency reliability (α =.96).”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Listwise deletion of the 7 ineligible participants does not bias the reliability estimates.
- Also stated in: § Reliability Assessment · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Body (α = .81)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mind (α = .88)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, 29 items were removed because they did not resonate with the subconstructs and the overall construct of spiritual healing from trauma.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thirty-seven major concepts, patterns and themes were identified from various areas of study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The analysis found substantial evidence supporting the use of spiritual healing for trauma-based interventions, which informed the researcher in developing items for the new scale.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 118
- It may state two separate claims as one. 41
- The quote only partly states this claim. 12
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“an item pool of 50 items was created”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subsequently, the working definition of spiritual healing was formed within the conceptual mapping of hope, mind-body-spirit recovery and meaning-making.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The last three items of the scale had missing values and therefore, consensus and variability are reported in varying percentage for those three items namely 80%, 60% and 80%, respectively”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“7 reported loss or death of a loved one”
plainn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“3 items were newly added”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The SMEs' assessments of the degree to which each scale item accurately reflects one of the five sub-constructs are valid indicators of item-subconstruct correspondence.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Over one-third were Black or African American (39%)”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Concepts and patterns like hope (Allen & Wozniak, 2014; Boddy et al., 2018; Collins, 2015; Glaser & Glassman, 2014; Mancini et al., 2013; Schwartz et al., 2007), mind-body-spirit recovery (Bourne &Watts, 2011; DuBose, 2018; Hodge, 2020; Metheany & Coholic, 2019; Nowakiwuski-Sims & Kumar, 2020; Rinkel et al., 2018) and meaning-making (Lachnit & George, 2020; Park, 2010; Park, 2013; Starnino, 2016;”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allen & Wozniak, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bourne &Watts, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Lachnit & George, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eleven of the 50 items were re-worded”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The SMEs' assessments of the degree to which each scale item accurately reflects one of the five sub-constructs are valid indicators of item-subconstruct correspondence.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and another third were White (36%)”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Five chose physical harm or injury”
plainn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Their mean age was 46 years (standard deviation [SD] = 9.42).”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The scale's overall concepts were not changed by pilot testing”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“3 reported threats of physical harm”
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“4 reported physical, emotional, or sexual abuse”
plainn = 4- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Some of the initial items that were developed were found to be not aligned with the construct of spiritual healing. They were removed because they did not thoroughly assess the construct due to their redundancy in wording (Lynn, 1986).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lynn, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, among the total of 26 participants, there were no missing values or unanswered items.”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and just under half lived in suburbs (45.5%)”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“3 were removed from the original scale based on SMEs feedback”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The SMEs' assessments of the degree to which each scale item accurately reflects one of the five sub-constructs are valid indicators of item-subconstruct correspondence.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“6 reported witnessing a traumatic event”
plainn = 6- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“About half lived in an urban environment (51.5%)”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two-thirds of the participants were female (66.7 %).”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each subscale has 10 items for a total of 50 items (see Appendix G).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Seventy-nine items were initially generated and categorized under five subconstructs: hope, mind, body, spirit, and meaning-making.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Other concepts, patterns, and themes include transcend (Swinton, 2012), restoring wellness and regaining health (Hussain & Dein, 2018), learning to regulate healing energy (Bourne & Watts, 2011), and regaining hope (Boddy et al., 2018; Collins, 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Swinton, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Hussain & Dein, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bourne & Watts, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Those five subconstructs were the key subconstructs identified through the content analysis.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Growth, progress, and healing take place among trauma clients, gradually reaching a level of being healed from trauma.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Seven cases did not meet the eligibility criteria.”
plainn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I identify goals in my life r(26) = .58”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correlation between item 6 and 2 was weak and not statistically significant: r(26) = -.00.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I find beauty in unexpected moments since my trauma r(26) = -.20.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Out of the 26 participants, 14 reported the age when traumatic event/s first occurred between ages of 4-25”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The content analysis of qualitative and quantitative studies revealed that spiritual healing interventions offer a nuanced approach.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“12 reported the age when traumatic event/s first occurred between ages 26-61”
plainn = 12- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and I seek meaning in my life r(26) = .41.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results showed that 22 chose the option items were clear and 4 chose a few items were unclear (see Tables 13 and 14).”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I identify goals in my life r(26) = .47”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“18.2% of the participants received professional treatment for the trauma they experienced”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I feel safe despite the trauma that I experienced in the past r(26) = .42”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I believe I can experience uplifting moments despite my past trauma r(26) = .50”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no linear, negative, and highly positive correlations reported.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I draw on spiritual strength to face life's challenges r(26) = .61”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eight reported that they consider themselves healed”
plainn = 8- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“nearly two-thirds (63.6%) reported that they have not had any professional treatment for the trauma they have experienced in their lives”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Out of the 26 participants, 3 indicated too many items and the remaining 23 indicated the right amount of items.”
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“11 reported emotional or psychological harm”
plainn = 11- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I believe I can experience uplifting moments despite my past trauma r(26) = .56”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Item 1: I draw strength from prior traumatic experiences had a significant positive correlation with items namely, I engage in actions that help me understand challenging life events r(26) = .48; I appreciate value-based reflections r(26) = .52; I maintain a positive self-talk about the healing process r(26) = .57; I am comfortable discussing existential questions with supportive individuals r(26)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I appreciate value-based reflections r(26) = .55”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no linear, negative and highly positive correlation reported.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The unique role of spirituality in trauma recovery in helping professions has highlighted the necessity for developing measurements to assess the level of healing among people who have experienced traumatic events.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“According to van der Weegen et al. (2019), this tradition emphasizes a holistic approach that directly improves the health of the mind, body, spirit, and environment.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites van der Weegen et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“In recent times, the role of spirituality in the recovery pathway for trauma survivors has gained considerable attention (Butler et al., 2017; Harris et al., 2021; Muehlhausen, 2021; Wang, 2024).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Butler et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Harris et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Muehlhausen, 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, spiritual healing has not been fully examined in conventional healthcare settings as it has been categorized as Complementary Alternative Medicine (CAM) by the scientific community.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Intermittent trauma is usually caused by a single, sudden event such as a disaster or an accident (Biswas et al., 2022; Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Biswas et al., 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Similarly, spiritual healing in the helping professions demonstrate the integration of health and wellness primarily based on physical well-being and the connectivity of mind, body, and spirit (Edmands et al., 1999; Krippner, 2014; Wang, 2024).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Edmands et al., 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Krippner, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wang, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A state of harmony between the body, emotions, mind, community, and spirit is achieved through spiritual healing (Benor, 1995).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Benor, 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Of those, over 8% develop symptoms of a Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Koenen et al., 2017; Schein et al., 2021).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Koenen et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schein et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Existing tools like the PTGI, CAPS-5, and OHS provide insights into healing but do not focus specifically on”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recognizing that people frequently face traumatic events, spiritual healing practices provide a healing pathway embedded with hope, meaning, and a sense of connection to something larger than themselves (Nowakowski-Sims & Kumar, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nowakowski-Sims & Kumar, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is no synthesis available to date that captures the interconnection between spiritual healing and trauma.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The lifetime prevalence of trauma history is approximately 89.7% in adults (Kilpatrick et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kilpatrick et al., 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Notably, Ka'apu and Burnette (2019) supported culture-based and collective solutions for Indigenous people dealing with traumatic events.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ka'apu & Burnette, 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Furthermore, there is evidence-based research that demonstrates an individual's spirituality is associated with better health and less stress (Calicchia & Graham, 2006; Lustyk et al., 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Calicchia & Graham, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Lustyk et al., 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Thus, it impacts on a person's sense of wholeness where they are struggling to survive and healing is highly required (Krystal, 2015; van der Kolk, 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Krystal, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites van der Kolk, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though the literature about spirituality and trauma is expanding, there are still several gaps.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“The holistic health paradigm, emphasizing the necessity of incorporating spiritual healing into typical medical treatment, shows a more widespread acknowledgment of the significant contribution of spiritual healing to modern healthcare services (Dalle Ave & Sulmasy, 2021).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dalle Ave & Sulmasy, 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Theories concerning healing have sought to uncover diverse mechanisms that encompass the modification of expectations, the process of remoralization, and the fostering of hope (Hinton & Kirmayer, 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hinton & Kirmayer, 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, the prevalence of trauma that is existing among the adults in the US indicates the need for developing a new scale.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, a traumatic experience an individual goes through or witnesses, is interpreted as a threat to an individual's sense of safety (Dombo et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dombo et al., 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Principles of trauma-informed care are closely related to spiritual healing which aims to restore the survivor's strengths and promote posttraumatic growth (Levenson, 2017; 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Levenson, 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Levenson, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Lozano et al. (2017) pointed out that acute trauma often leads to neuroinflammation that, if left untreated, may be followed by long-term consequences.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lozano et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Multifaceted approaches are proven effective based on integrated principles to promote sustainable recovery and healing (Boynton & Mellan, 2021; Dutton et al., 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boynton & Mellan, 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Dutton et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Trauma is perceived as a wound at the deepest level of one's being i.e., at the spiritual level (Pasquale, 2015; Starnino, 2016; Starnino & Sullivan, 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Pasquale, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Starnino, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Starnino & Sullivan, 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fundamentally, spiritual healing within the context of helping professions offers a holistic strategy for enhancing clients' overall well-being (Nilsson, 2021).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nilsson, 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This approach confirms that the healing process is multidimensional, encompassing the physical, spiritual, and psychological aspects determining genuine health (Kim & Shin, 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kim & Shin, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The holistic approach involves the interfacing of mind, body, and spirit in providing and receiving care (Kelley et al., 2024; Stark et al., 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kelley et al., 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Stark et al., 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Trauma is experienced in different ways and can be acute, chronic, or complex trauma (Kira, 2001).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kira, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Also, trauma affects meaning-making processes, and individuals may end up in existential distress (Semple et al., 2019).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Semple et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Likewise, Classen et al. (2017) noted the positive role that spiritual and holistic models have on PTSD treatment, whereby spirituality enhances conventional treatment modalities.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Classen et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Further, trauma bears witness to the lived experience of overwhelming helplessness and fear, but also to a shattering of personal agency and critical social reality (Dennis, 2016; Doucet & Rovers, 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dennis, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Doucet & Rovers, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, there is a dearth of literature about the best ways to include healing practices and spiritual perspectives into clinical treatment when it comes to measuring the”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Major themes and components that were identified to develop the new scale from the existing literature include hope (Allen & Wozniak, 2014; Boddy et al., 2018; Collins, 2015; Glaser & Glassman, 2014; Mancini et al., 2013; Schwartz et al., 2007), the mind-body-spirit connection (Bourne & Watts, 2011; DuBose, 2018; Hodge, 2020; Metheany & Coholic, 2019; Nowakiwuski-Sims & Kumar, 2020; Rinkel et al.,”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allen & Wozniak, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Boddy et al., 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bourne & Watts, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Indeed, trauma impacts almost every aspect of a person's life and therefore effective interventions that treat the whole person are required (van der Kolk, 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites van der Kolk, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Cultivating spirituality enables the individual to gain hope and purpose in life, thus experiencing improvement in emotional regulation and coping in the long run (Sutton et al., 2018; Vides et al., 2022).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sutton et al., 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Vides et al., 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Classen et al. (2017) observed that different treatment approaches help in the reduction of PTSD symptoms and the overall regulation of emotions in those with complex trauma backgrounds.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Classen et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Spiritual healing is increasingly recognized as a significant process and approach within helping professions, when engaging with individuals who have experienced traumatic incidents (Boynton & Vis, 2022; Malliar Bellian, 2024; Ross et al., 2023).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boynton & Vis, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Malliar Bellian, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ross et al., 2023
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For instance, the levels of stress of car accident survivors may be higher immediately after the event, and if not treated early may lead to chronic conditions (Lozano et al., 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lozano et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Notably, spirituality encompasses all racial backgrounds, genders, sexual orientations, and abilities or impairments and is nondenominational, nonprejudiced, and values shared meanings (Jang & LaMendola, 2007; Mitroff & Denton, 1999).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jang & LaMendola, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Mitroff & Denton, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“There is a high incidence of exposure to trauma, as more than 80% of Americans experience a traumatic event.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Koenen et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schein et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Factor analysis identified five broad domains of post-trauma growth: Spiritual change, personal strength or resilience, new possibilities, a sense of appreciation for life, and closeness to others, (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004; Triplette et al., 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Triplette et al., 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“While the .70 threshold for Cronbach's alpha is commonly used in the literature on behavioral science (Cortina, 1993; Gregory & Tucker Edmonds, 2024)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cortina, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gregory & Tucker Edmonds, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All the SMEs had doctoral degrees as their highest level of education.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Since the acceptability of Cronbach's alpha is influenced by the scale's intended use (Cortina, 1993; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994) as well as other psychometric properties (Schmitt, 1996)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cortina, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schmitt, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“This scale development method had been used by several experts including Gregory (2022), Price (2016), Rea and Parker (2014), and Thompson (2004).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gregory (2022)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Price (2016)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Rea and Parker (2014) and Thompson (2004)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Johanson and Brooks (2010) in their study on pilot testing, recommended a minimum sample size of 30 for preliminary scale development.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Johanson and Brooks (2010)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Thus, items were generated from existing literature, ensuring their relevance and validating item categorization (DeVellis & Thorpe, 2022; Thompson, 2004).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites DeVellis & Thorpe, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Thompson, 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Items reflect the overall construct of spiritual healing, which can be a desirable process of recovery among clients who have experienced trauma.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to traditional psychometric test theory, the observed score is the total of the true and error scores (Allen & Yen, 1979).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Allen & Yen, 1979
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was designed to ensure that it maintained robust eligibility criteria for the participants.”
plainn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The CAPS is a systematic clinical tool comprising 30 items, designed specifically for the evaluation of trauma clients and patients (Blake et al., 1995).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Blake et al., 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Therefore, measurement error must be decreased, and psychometric findings must be replicated to reliably and validly quantify trauma survivors' spiritual healing beliefs and attitudes (Gregory, 2022; Kline, 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gregory, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kline, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The primary benefit of the pilot test was that it provided a preliminary estimation of internal consistency and reliability (Hertzog, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hertzog, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Trauma Healing Scale (THS) comprises 30 items designed to assess the healing process by evaluating aspects such as self-compassion, meaning-making, and relational healing, thereby offering a more comprehensive view of healing (Kilmer & Gil-Rivas, 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kilmer & Gil-Rivas, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Out of 10 SMEs to whom the material was sent with a request to participate in the study, six SMEs (60%) completed the task and submitted feedback.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such a tool would enable practitioners to systematically assess the level of spiritual healing and overall well-being of trauma clients.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“CAPS is recognized for its ability to diagnose PTSD and the level of symptom severity (Blake et al., 1995).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Blake et al., 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“participation in the study was entirely voluntary.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Based on the feedback provided by the SMEs, the initial pool of items was revised (Donaldson & Donaldson, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Donaldson & Donaldson, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“PTGI was developed to provide a measure of positive psychological changes that can occur because of some traumatic experience (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it can be time-consuming to administer and may not always align with the more holistic modalities often practiced in spiritually-based treatments.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, the CAPS-5 is a well-utilized diagnostic test assessing PTSD symptoms, as its long administration time may not be feasible for certain settings.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Weathers et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Creating a new scale that captures the unique characteristics of spiritual healing relevant to diverse helping fields is essential.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The face validity of this metric may be achieved using two techniques: Subject Matter Expert consultation and pilot testing (Lin & Jacobs, 2008)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lin & Jacobs, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Spiritual healing is considered interdisciplinary in nature, extending its reach to various helping professions, including psychology, nursing, social work, counseling, psychiatry, and education (Swenson, 1997).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Swenson, 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This content analysis contributed extensively to the development of a tool encompassing these themes and components to generate a new scale on spiritual healing from trauma.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The construct of spiritual healing from trauma can be adequately measured by a self-report scale.
- Rests on an assumption: The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
In the paper
“Organizational Healing is a 32-item measure developed to assess the healing process of organizations recovering from traumatic or widespread painful experiences (Karsantik & Cayak, 2025).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Karsantik & Cayak, 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The confidentiality of the participants was safeguarded by taking steps such as deleting any identifiable information and not collecting any personal information.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Spirituality Index of Well-Being (SIWB) is a standardized instrument designed to evaluate the influence of spirituality on quality of life, containing 12 items that assess self-efficacy and lifestyle (Daaleman & Frey, 2004).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Daaleman & Frey, 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While analyzing the data, the researcher ensured that robust eligibility criteria were met and found out those seven participants who did not meet the criteria.”
plainn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A significant shortcoming is the absence of a dedicated scale for evaluating spiritual healing in the helping professions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The MTRR scale is a self-evaluation instrument comprising 135 items aimed at assessing resources related to trauma and the recovery process (Harvey et al., 2003).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Harvey et al., 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“its interpretive guidelines have been questioned (Cortina, 1993; Schmitt, 1996; Taber, 2018)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cortina, 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schmitt, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Taber, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“This systematic review, which incorporates specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, search methodologies, and notably data synthesis, enables researchers to enhance the quality of evidence and promote transparency (Gough et al., 2017; Moher et al., 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gough et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Moher et al., 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The CAPS-5, developed by the National Center for PTSD, is the most widely widely used as a diagnostical tool that captures 20 symptoms divided into four subscales (Weathers et al., 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Weathers et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Cronbach's alpha may provide a metric indicating how connected the items were to one another (DeVellis & Thorpe, 2022; Price, 2016)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites DeVellis & Thorpe, 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Price, 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“All participants were informed of the risks involved in this study and content warnings due to the study's delicate subject matter (Piedmont, 2024).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Piedmont, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although spiritual healing has potential advantages in trauma recovery, there are no established guidelines for its incorporation into traditional trauma therapy.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study including SME Consultation and Pilot Testing was reviewed by Indiana University's Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) staff.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The domain sampling theory focused on content validity, or how well the instrument's items captured the concept's subject matter (Devellis, 2003; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Devellis, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The items in this scale were developed from the literature based on a Content Analysis (Rubin & Babbie, 1997) and a sampling theory of item construction (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rubin & Babbie, 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Items reflect the overall construct of spiritual healing, which can be a desirable process of recovery among clients who have experienced trauma.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the study was performed using demographic questions and 50 items and a few open-ended questions and rating items, there are concerns regarding generalizability of the findings as they are not yet validated.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subject Matter Experts were consulted to establish face validity and content validity.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, there may be cultural and contextual limitations due to the nuances of different cultural groups among the respondents.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since not all the studies reviewed were empirical, there are potential challenges to filter them in a strict sense.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Interestingly, integrating the spiritual healing dynamic provides a platform for the client to discover and find meaning, purpose, and hope amidst adversity (Weinberg, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Weinberg, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The unique role of spirituality in trauma recovery in helping professions has highlighted the necessity for developing measurements to assess the levels of healing among people who have experienced traumatic events.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These concepts highlight a deep exploration into the overall construct of spiritual healing from trauma.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The subscales such as Mind, Body, and Spirit have close conceptual connections with those insights that were addressed in earlier studies.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Other studies emphasized the idea of interconnectivity and encouraged people to explore themselves, others, and the deeper self, spirit, or transcendent world (Smith et al., 2021) as well as improved community connectivity and social networks/supports, considered the cornerstone of emotional and psychological wellness (Smith et al., 2021).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Smith et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, the absence of strong theoretical justification further points to the need for factorial validation using EFA.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other limitations include limited data validity and lack of participant perspectives as this phase was not yet the primary data collection.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Diverse respondents may have understood the context of the study differently.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, potential biases of the researcher might have also impacted the study while capturing and synthesizing diverse concepts, themes, and patterns.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Cronbach's α for the Hope subscale was .84, which is considered very good (Kline, 2005).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kline, 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study shows the possibility of trustworthy scale development and evidence-based procedures in spiritual healing from trauma.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The study's sample of 26 participants is representative enough for preliminary psychometric assessment.
In the paper
“Incorporating spiritual healing into diverse helping practice settings provides practitioners opportunities to assess the level of healing of people who have undergone trauma, losses, or suffering (Weinberg, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Weinberg, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subconstructs like hope and meaning-making are pivotal to the discussion of spiritual healing from trauma.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Spiritual healing has not been fully examined in conventional healthcare and practice settings because it has been perceived along with Complementary Alternative Medicine (CAM) by the scientific community.
“Spiritual healing has not been fully examined in conventional healthcare and practice settings as it has been perceived along with Complementary Alternative Medicine (CAM) by the scientific community.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Spiritual healing from trauma is a measurable construct that can be assessed with a psychometric scale.
“Integrating evidence-informed spiritual healing into the helping professions to address trauma-based issues could be effectively carried out with the help of a psychometric instrument to assess the level of spiritual healing from trauma.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The literature reviewed is sufficient to identify the major domains of spiritual healing from trauma.
“Major themes and components that were identified to develop the new scale from the existing literature include hope”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no specific tool to assess the level of gradual healing that is taking place among clients after traumatic events in their lives.
“However, there is no specific tool to assess the level of gradual healing that is taking place among clients after the occurrence of traumatic events in their lives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Available scales do not fully cover the construct of spiritual healing aimed at holistic recovery from trauma.
“Available scales do not fully cover the construct of spiritual healing aimed at holistic recovery from trauma.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Items reflect the overall construct of spiritual healing, which can be a desirable process of recovery among clients who have experienced trauma.
“The assumption of the researcher is that items reflect the overall construct of spiritual healing, which can be a desirable process of recovery among clients who have experienced trauma.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Growth, progress, and healing take place among trauma clients, gradually reaching a level of being healed from trauma.
“The contention is that growth, progress and healing take place among trauma clients, gradually reaching a level of being healed from trauma.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Trauma clients will experience spiritual healing as a process of recovery, and recovery becomes an outcome of the spiritual practices and related efforts used by clients and practitioners.
“Eventually, trauma clients will experience spiritual healing as a process of recovery; and the recovery becomes an outcome of the spiritual practices and related efforts used by the clients and practitioners.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The role of evidence-based practices in spiritual healing has often been neglected in mainstream healthcare settings.
“based practices in spiritual healing must be systematically documented, as their role has often been neglected in mainstream healthcare settings.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The construct of spiritual healing from trauma can be adequately measured by a self-report scale.
“This content analysis contributed extensively to the development of a tool encompassing these themes and components to generate a new scale on spiritual healing from trauma.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The content analysis captured the relevant evidence-based spiritual practices and themes for spiritual healing from trauma.
“The results of the Content Analysis revealed evidence-based spiritual practices that were used with trauma clients.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The SMEs' assessments of the degree to which each scale item accurately reflects one of the five sub-constructs are valid indicators of item-subconstruct correspondence.
“when they were asked to assess the degree to which each scale item accurately reflect one of the five sub-constructs from the list.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Listwise deletion of the 7 ineligible participants does not bias the reliability estimates.
“A listwise deletion approach (Acock, 2005; Newman, 2014) was employed by the researcher to treat those 7 ineligible participants.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The study's sample of 26 participants is representative enough for preliminary psychometric assessment.
“The study used statistical analyses with a focus on research design with a representative sample (N=26).”
The paper relies on this without support.
A significant gap in the existing literature is the absence of a dedicated scale for evaluating spiritual healing in the helping professions.
“Although some existing scales such as PTGI, CAPS-5, and OHS provide insights into healing dimensions, a significant gap in the existing literature was the absence of a dedicated scale for evaluating spiritual healing in the helping professions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The constant interplay between mind-body-spirit in the healing process is evident in multiple empirical studies.
“The constant interplay that is happening in the healing process between the mind-body-spirit is evident in multiple empirical studies.”
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“r(26) = .42, p < .01”
Reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .026
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upr(26) = 0.42reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .026
“r(26) = .42, p < .01”
- Not confirmedr(26) = 0.65reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .65, p < .0”
- Not confirmedr(26) = 0.64reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .64, p < .0”
- Not confirmedr(26) = 0.71reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .71, p < .0”
- Not confirmedr(26) = 0.69reported p < 0 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .69, p < .0”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.7reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .70, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.61reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .61, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.81reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .81, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.63reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .63, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.59reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .59, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.66reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .66, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.64reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .64, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.71reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .71, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.83reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .83, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.65reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .65, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.8reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .80, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.69reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .69, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.62reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .62, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.72reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .72, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.78reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .78, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.82reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .82, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.73reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .73, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.74reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .74, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.67reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .67, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.76reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .76, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.56reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .002
“r(26) = .56, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.85reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .85, p < .01”
- Consistentr(26) = 0.68reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001
“r(26) = .68, p < .01”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
“All the participants (100%) reported prior traumatic events at least one year ago.”
“6. Ever experienced a traumatic event/events at least 1 year ago 26 1 2 1.18”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“About the right amount of items 23 69.7 85.2 100.0”
Reported 85.2 · recomputed 88.461538
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Two-thirds of the participants were female (66.7 %).”
“3. Gender 26 1 2 1.67 .479”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“The Cronbach's alpha values for self-efficacy and life scheme were 0.86 and 0.89, respectively”
“Self-efficacy α = 0.81 Life scheme α = 0.80”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Authors
- Malliar Bellian, P.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Indianapolis
- Venue
- Indiana University Indianapolis
- Publisher
- Indiana University Indianapolis
- Published
- 2026
- OpenAlex
- W7162648976
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- dissertation
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- IU Indianapolis University Library
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
- Keywords
- spiritual healing, trauma, scale development, psychometric validation, 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Malliar Bellian Spiritual Healing from Trauma Scale: Preliminary Scale Development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7912/4s2m-b722
- The paper
- Malliar Bellian, P. (2026). Malliar Bellian Spiritual Healing from Trauma Scale: Preliminary Scale Development. Indiana University Indianapolis. https://doi.org/10.7912/4s2m-b722
