Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Relational spirituality and quality of life 2007 to 2017: an integrative research review

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes volume 16, Article number: 75 (2018) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Despite the increasing number of evidence-based research on relational spirituality (RS) and quality of life (QoL) in medical-health research, little is known about the links between RS and QoL outcomes and the mechanisms by which RS aspects are functionally tied to QoL.

Objective

To determine how RS is perceived/positioned in relation to QoL, we (a) examined recent available data that identify and appraise the links between RS and QoL; (b) identified themes emerging from the association between RS and QoL, and (c) discussed the implications of the effects of RS on QoL outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an integrative research review of English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 2007 to March 2017 which examined an association between RS and QoL, as identified from a search of three databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect.

Results

A total of 20 studies were analysed. Of these, twelve (60%) reported positive association between RS and QoL, three (15%) studies reported inverse associations, whereas five (25%) studies showed evidence of lack of association (with two out of the five studies showing an indirect association). Physical health and psychological functioning were the most researched domains of QoL, and some studies suggest an attachment-based model of RS in the last 10 years of RS and QoL research. Studies conducted with participants with serious illnesses ranging from dementia, cardiac arrest, and breast cancer reported no association between RS and physical health. Our review shows evidence of both the direct and/or indirect effects of RS on QoL as a possible spiritual coping model for complementary alternative health therapy, albeit occurring through several religious-related psychosocial conduits.

Conclusion and implication

RS appears to be associated with health benefits as indicated across QoL domains. General medical practitioners and other healthcare agencies could benefit from the understanding that a spiritual coping model could aid their patients, and therefore their clinical practices, in the healing process.

Background

There is a growing body of research that promotes spirituality as an internal locus of control in terms of regulating negative emotional states [1, 2]. These studies assert spiritual activities as helpful means of attaining self-transcendence and coping with life stressors. Chaney and Southwick [3] made such a claim in their book Resilience, describing how people overcome life’s challenges by searching for connectedness and seeking comfort in spirituality based on what is transcendent. Spirituality differs in many ways from ‘religiosity/religiousness’. The former emphasizes the personal character of spiritual transcendence in terms of the changing, developing constitutive trait and dynamic attribute one has from cradle to grave [4], whereas the latter is considered in terms of the institutionalised character of religious beliefs. In this paper, we refer to relational spirituality (RS) as the former—as an important platform for personal development that draws people to forge meaning in life through spiritual transcendence [5]. Piedmont [6] ascribes a special role to RS with regards to spiritual transcendence, arguing that it should be considered as the sixth domain of personality since it represents a broad-based motivational domain and language term (e.g., universality, prayer fulfilment, and connectedness) that capture adaptively important psychological qualities that are comparable to The Big Five personality: Neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. Several other authors have weighed in on the concept of spirituality and provided different definitions. For example, as “the personal quest for understanding answers to ultimate questions about life” [7], “an organised system of beliefs and symbols designed to facilitate closeness to the sacred” [8], an aspect of quality of life [9, 10], “as subjective belief systems that incorporate self-awareness and reference to a transcendence dimension” ([11]: 288), as a perceived relationship with a ‘divine attachment figure’ [12], and the “unique window into attachment processes in adulthood” ([13]: 917).

In examining the above definitions, it seems that RS is mostly discussed within two categories: (1) as a cognitive appraisal of existential issues and (2) as the experiential knowledge of the divine [14]. The former recognises RS in connection to the cognitive appraisal of stressors and interpersonal struggles when the individual is in a relationship with the sacred and often referred to as the ‘head-knowledge of God’ [15]. The latter focuses more on the ‘heart-knowledge of God’ [15] in its application of attachment theory and developmental psychology. Both perspectives of RS draw largely from a relational perspective [16], and will be used for guiding this review in terms of the conceptualisation of RS as implicit relational and experiential representations of the sacred that are essential to faith development, spiritual transcendence, and appraising life stressors and QoL.

QoL is used in health-related research to study life satisfaction and the extent to which an individual evaluates their holistic life experience from a subjective point of view [67]. It is a broad-ranging concept “affected in a complex way by the person’s physical health, psychological state, level of independence, social relationships, and their relationship to salient features of their environment” ([75], p.1404), and covering several aspects of individual needs satisfaction that constitute aspects of life that contribute to overall experience.

QoL has much to do with individual satisfaction with key areas of life that enhance a general sense of physical and emotional well-being. Research shows that this concept is applicable for adolescents [17], women [18], migrants [19, 20], older adults [21], religious people [22], non-religious groups [23], among others. Studies have also shown that QoL has much broader implication for health care [24] and life satisfaction [25]. As a context-specific construct [26], measures of QoL are used to assess the individual evaluation of their health-related outcomes, and in recent cases, modified for assessing disease-specific QoL outcomes. These include, HIV/AIDS-targeted QoL [27], geriatric quality of life-dementia (GQOL-D) [28], QoL—alzheimer disease scale (e.g., [29]), and heart-disease specific QoL scale (e.g., [30]).

Researchers recognise QoL as a multidimensional concept in terms of its subjective, objective, and culture/spirituality components, while at the same time identifying the relationship between these aspects (e.g., [9, 25, 31, 32]). Marshall [33] and Rule [34] mention income, education, and housing as examples of objective aspects of QoL. Collinge et al. [35], along with O’Connell and Skevington [36], spirituality’ as/spirituality’ as an important aspect of QoL.

The subjective satisfaction aspect is the most researched aspect in QoL literature, as it mostly assesses physical health, psychological health, social relationship health, and environmental health (e.g., [31, 35]). While QoL is likely to be related to individual contexts, as well as to the subjective satisfaction aspects, we argue that the spiritual aspect may be related to beneficial health outcomes and should be positioned as an additional conceptualisation of RS. A similar proposition can be seen in other studies (e.g., [9, 10]), concluding that one’s spiritual well-being is an important aspect of QoL since it influences the subjective domain. The concept of QoL is continuum in nature since it considers overall life satisfaction that is connected with the individual’s physical, mental, environmental, social, and spiritual functioning. Nonetheless, QoL is constantly changing, depending on the lived experience resulting from several factors that control one’s life, especially ones related to self-transcendence and the connection to the sacred [37].

Based on this theoretical and empirical background, RS may be perceived as a relational dynamic and an implicit relational representation (e.g., [16]) that highlights a perspective which seeks to understand the human need for an object of devotion and spiritual functioning, guiding the quest for meaning and attachment to the sacred (e.g., [16, 38, 39]), in terms of its association with QoL. This relational perspective is largely drawn from the works of object relations theorists (e.g., [40,41,42]), and recently, RS has been theorized from an attachment theoretical perspective [16]. Although the original thesis on attachment proposed by Bowlby [43] largely assumed an evolutionary perspective and its manifestation in parent-child relationships, he also noted that attachment processes may have a broad implication for psychological development throughout a person’s life. Cicirelli [44] studied lifespan attachment developments among older adults, with empirical evidence supporting a strong sense of attachment to God among older adults. Other studies (e.g., [16, 37, 45]) have proposed an idea of a RS that can be interpreted in terms of an attachment-based model, one defined as a perceived relationship with the sacred. Granqvist and Kirkpatrick [13] refer to this as the maturational aspect of attachment development resulting from the increased ability in core specific cognitive tasks such as processing speed (e.g., [46]), voluntary response suppression (e.g., [47]), and working memory (e.g., [48]), which are usually immature in childhood [49].

Several studies (e.g., [13, 16, 50]) have integrated the principles of Bowlby’s [43] attachment theory into the study of religious and spiritual development. Aspects of RS as an attachment-based model of spiritual development have been reported in studies (e.g., [37]) suggesting that attachment relational variables consistently emerge as predictors of various outcome variables that match spiritual and psychological well-being. For example, Augustyn et al. [37] report that RS (through spiritual practices such as prayer, awareness of God, spiritual meaning, and forgiveness) strengthens the link between spiritual well-being and psychological outcomes. Bradshaw and Kent [22] report that RS in terms of an attachment connection to the sacred strengthens the relationship between prayer and psychological outcomes. However, Sloan et al. [51, 52] have criticized empirical studies’ claim of health benefits associated with religiosity, arguing that about 83% of the studies making such claims were methodologically flawed and misrepresented data; thus, there is no empirical basis for asserting that religious involvement is related to positive health outcomes. Miller and Thoresen [53] have argued that the consistency of empirical reports on the effects of spirituality on health-related outcomes point toward salutary effects. Other studies (e.g., [54, 55]) have linked adverse effects to beliefs in a punitive divine figure, extrinsic religiousness, and upholding a religious moral standard.

Recent literature reviews (e.g., [56, 57]) have shown evidence of positive links between spirituality/religiosity and QoL, albeit these studies were mostly limited to organizational religious affiliation among elderly adults in South America (e.g., [56]) and how religious participation correlates to mental disorders (e.g., [57]). These two reviews found empirical support for the association between several aspects of religiosity and health and mental health outcomes. For example, Bonelli and Koenig’s [57] review provides evidence to show that religious involvement is associated with better mental health outcomes in 72.1% of the studies, while Abdala et al. [56] concluded, based on the positive association in 75% of the studies, that the religious affiliation of elderly South Americans is associated with better outcomes of quality of life. However, it seems that the conceptualisation used in these studies differ from that offered in our proposed study in terms of our definitions of RS and QoL. There appears to be no recent review study which appraises RS as (1) a domain of QoL that relates to spiritual functioning, and (2) a relational dynamic in terms of the relationship connection with a symbolic sacred object or figure, either through spiritual transcendence, prayer fulfilment, attachment to God, or other implicit relational conduits. In addition, while much has been done in promoting RS as an aspect of QoL, little is known about the broader perspective regarding the association between RS and QoL in disease-specific medical-health research. With debate around the salutary effects of RS on health outcomes, this paper contributes to the ongoing debate on how RS functioning is associated with perceptions of QoL. This study will thus: (1) review recent available data that identify and appraise the links between RS and QoL; (2) determine how RS is perceived/positioned in relation to QoL; (3) identify emerging themes emerging from the association between RS and QoL and (4) discuss the results and implications of the association between RS and QoL.

Methods

Review design

An integrative research review (IR) design is used to appraise the existing literature on RS and QoL. IR is a ‘systematic’ process “restricted to relevant studies that point to new data related to the study goals” ([58]: 12). The choice of an IR allows for synthesizing knowledge from diverse disciplinary sources to better describe a subject [59]. The use of this method to conduct a systematic literature review is especially appropriate for interpreting complex subjects. This is because it deconstructs theoretical and interdisciplinary domains related to such topics in order to formulate new reliable models, research agendas, or a meta index of meanings and definitions [60]. An IR contrasts with meta-analysis in that its aim is to have a comprehensive collection of literature, especially when the subject is in one knowledge domain. An IR is comparative for review of subjects from diverse knowledge domains, as is the case in this review, and consistent with previous review on the subject (i.e., [56]). An IR also has a more flexible and inclusive review design (involving both quantitative and qualitative studies), compared to other types of review methods. It allows for a more purposeful selection and inclusion of diverse data sources and empirical contributions which show the association between RS and QoL in diverse and broad sampling frames. Hence, we have targeted and integrated representative sources of research which have the potential to identify and appraise the links between RS and QoL.

Data sources

As shown in Fig. 1, a search was carried out between February and March 2017 using three online databases (i.e., PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect) with DeCsFootnote 1 and MeSHFootnote 2 keywords such as ‘religion’ or ‘spirituality’ and ‘quality of life’ or ‘health,’ and later specified using the following keyword strings: ‘spirituality and quality of life’; ‘religion and quality of life’. We chose PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect as reliable electronic databases for our literature search because they are leading sources for assessing scientific, technical, and medical research, which have not been used in previous literature reviews, except for Bonelli & Koenig [57] who used PubMed in their literature review search. Abdala et al. [56], on the other hand, used different sources for their literature search, including Virtual Health Library, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), and the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Prisma flow diagram of the study based on literature search from February to March 2017

Full size image

A variety of online database routes were explored in order to ensure that relevant studies related to RS and QoL were retrieved, especially ones that had not been covered in previous reviews. PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect were informative in regard to literature reporting on the effects of RS on QoL. Study abstracts bearing the relevant keywords were extracted and read by the first author (see Fig. 1), and the outcome of the studies was reviewed by the second and third authors. Over 185 articles were found in the initial online search, from which 32 articles were selected after reading the abstracts while 153 were rejected due to their lack of clarity in terms of the conceptualisations of RS and QoL offered in the studies. After extensive data screening and full-reading of the 32 selected articles, as of the time of conducting this review (March 2017), 12 studies were rejected for not meeting the selection criteria, leaving 20 for review. Studies were either included or excluded for the review based on the following criteria:

Inclusion criteria

  • Date of publication: 2007 to March 2017.

  • English-language peer-reviewed articles with published abstracts on PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect.

  • Empirical, cross-sectional, longitudinal, quantitative, and qualitative studies.

  • Studies reporting on the association between RS and QoL.

  • Studies that explored either one or two or all aspects of QoL in terms of its subjective, objective, and spiritual/cultural factors.

  • Studies that conceptualised RS as a domain of QoL concerned with spiritual functioning and a relational dynamic that represents attachment to a sacred object or figure.

Exclusion criteria

  • Non-English publications.

  • Reviews, theoretical articles, books, chapters, dissertations, conference proceedings, blog articles, and working papers.

  • Studies not indexed by either PubMed, PsycINFO, or ScienceDirect.

  • Studies published before 2007 and after March 2017.

Data analysis

Information was collected regarding several study characteristics, including the name of the author(s), country where the study was conducted, sample size, research design, context, and sample characteristics. Data were extracted from studies examining the association between RS and QoL and an IR was conducted following the five-step guideline recommended by Whittemore and Knafl [59]:

  1. I)

    Recognise the research problem and/or analysis purpose

  2. II)

    conduct a systematic literature search of recent studies

  3. III)

    appraise and summarise the quality and results of the selected articles

  4. IV)

    review selected quality articles to identify possible themes

  5. V)

    organise the themes and critically analyse them in relation to the research problem.

First, the purpose of our review is to address the claims about RS and QoL outcomes so as to determine how RS is perceived/positioned in relation to QoL and the emerging themes that can help in interpreting the association between RS and QoL. We summarized results from previously conducted studies to appraise the conclusions from all studies relating to the claims of the effects of RS on QoL. As shown in Tables 1Footnote 3 and 2,Footnote 4 we summarized and compared empirical data in our IR to allow for the achievement of general conclusions about the research problem [58], and analysed results as direct evidence, indirect, positive, and negative associations and lack of associations.

Table 1 Articles related to relational spirituality and quality of life for the last 10 years
Full size table

Based on Whittemore and Knafl’s [59] second guideline, literature search of recent studies between 2007 to March 2017 was carried out using three online databases (e.g., PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect) with the aim of identifying studies that have investigated the links between RS and QoL. Third, to appraise and evaluate the quality and results of selected studies, we presented a clear and synthetic description of study data using Tables 1 and 2. Summarizing the data in tables allowed for the identification of knowledge gaps and pointed out the state of the art of the scientific production that results from selected studies examining the effects of RS on QoL [58]. For this reason, Tables 1 and 2 are drawn as concepts matrix [61] to help highlight study characteristics and summarise key themes from each study. The use of tables also aim to clarify the different contexts and themes that have been explored by the researchers, showing the procedures adopted to examine it, as well as their contributions on the subject.

Table 2 Emerging themes related to relational spirituality and quality of life for the last 10 years
Full size table

The fourth element of the 5-step guideline for IR involved reviewing selected studies in order to identify emerging themes that may help in conceptualizing the association between RS and QoL, as shown in Table 2. Themes summarized here help to identify areas for future studies and disclose relevant potential questions central to RS and QoL. Finally, emerging themes from our review were organized and critically analysed in the discussion section in relation to addressing the research problem on claims about the association between RS and QoL. Analysing study themes generated from reviewing diverse research output is expected to account for the integrated framework in terms of understanding the complexity of RS and QoL research. In conducting an IR, the authors addressed questions which related to existent knowledge regarding about the links between RS and QoL, the quality and complexity associated with these links, and steps for future research into investigating the effects of RS on QoL [58].

Results

All selected studies have been summarised in Table 1, showing evidence of positive (***), indirect (#*), negative association (**), and lack of association (#) between RS and QoL. A total of 132,053 participants were involved across the 20 selected studies. In particular, 70% of the studies were conducted with participants suffering from one form of mental or physical health-related challenge which included: 499 terminally ill elderly persons [62], 362 Muslim patients undergoing haemodialysis [63], 111 individuals with dementia [29], 44 couples (dyads) following a first-time cardiac event [30], 294 patients following an open-heart surgery [64], 63 outpatients with schizophrenia [65], 1024 older American adults [22], 8344 Norwegian cancer patients [66], 481 terminally ill cancer patients [67], 198 HIV/AIDS infected patients [27], 678 military veterans with PTSD [68], 8405 cancer survivors [69], 75 ALS patients and their caregivers (dyads) [70], and 162 Iranian women with breast cancer [71]. The remaining 30% were conducted with other study populations, including 87 college students [72], 1287 older Jews in Europe [73], 208 Jewish men and women [74], 274 older Koreans living alone in Chuncheon [28], 107, 683 older adults in a national health survey [75], and 1774 American adults [76].

All the 20 studies selected for the review employed quantitative research designs, while one study adopted a mixed-methods design (i.e., [29]). With the exception of a few prospective cohort studies (e.g., [22, 62, 67, 75]), for the most part a cross-sectional design was used.

Summarizing the frequency of association between RS and QoL

Positive association between RS and QoL

As shown in Table 1, of the 20 articles used for the predictive analyses outcomes, 12 (60%) of the studies with 12,917 participants reported positive associations between RS and QoL (e.g., [27, 28, 62,63,64,65, 68,69,70, 72, 74, 76]). Participants in these studies reported on the main effects of RS on their QoL, showing correlations between measures of RS and QoL. For example, Saffari et al. [63] found that spiritual resources accounted for substantial variance to better QoL and health; Idler et al. [62] reported that individuals with stronger religious attachment were more likely to have better QoL and fewer depressive feelings. In another report (e.g., [64]), RS, through adaptive faith-based coping mechanism such as prayer, was positively associated with psychological functioning among cardiac patients; this relationship was also strengthened by perceived social support from family, friends, and significant others at the time of participant’s surgery. The study showed the indirect influence of using prayer for coping on short-term QoL and positions prayer to functions as “the mediation of cognitive coping and perceived social support”. Calvo et al. [70] reported that QoL and life satisfaction of the caregivers of patients with ALS was associated with aspects of RS. Kashdan and Nezlek [72] reported a significant positive relationship between daily RS and psychological functioning (i.e., self-esteem, meaning in life, and positive affect).

Evidence shows that RS was associated with greater QoL and psychological health in a study [65] with mainly African American Christians in South-eastern United States (commonly identified as the Bible Belt region), where 98% of the respondents were involved in various aspects of RS that include religious activities such as prayer meetings, being connected to a religious community, praying once a day, meditation, and spiritual reading; as well as religious coping activities such as practising forgiveness, seeking spiritual support, collaborative religious coping, spiritual connection with God, religious purification, and benevolent religious reappraisals. Krumrei et al. [74] report a positive correlation between measures of physical health and RS in terms of ‘trust in God’ in both the adjusted and unadjusted models, and an inverse association between physical health and mistrust in God (i.e., didn’t trust God). RS accounted for the variance in depression and QoL among older Christian Koreans, with results showing significant associations between measures of RS and QoL [28]. However, this was not the case for Buddhist older Koreans who seem to attend religious meetings less regularly than the Christian respondents, based on the observations of the authors. Currier et al. [68] report on the salutary effects of spiritual functioning in terms of forgiveness of self and others on QoL outomes, noting that “Higher levels of spiritual functioning were associated with fewer forgiveness problems among Veterans, and their propensity to forgive self and others was also concurrently linked with QOL” (p.175). Other studies further show evidence of a positive association between a person’s faith experience and mental and physical functioning (e.g., [69]), and between spiritual behaviours and views developed through prayer and increases in QoL (e.g., [71]).

All these 12 studies make a case for the effects of RS on QoL and provide evidence to show that RS accounted for the variation in QoL and health status, particularly among older adults [28, 62, 64], military Veterans [68], cancer patients [69], persons with HIV/AIDS [27], Jewish men and women [74], lonely elderly Koreans [28], outpatients with schizophrenia [65], college students [72], patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis [70], patients recovering from heart surgery [64], patients undergoing haemodialysis [63], and patients with posttraumatic stress disorder [68].

Indirect association between RS and QoL

The study with individuals with dementia (IWD) coded in the ‘no association’ (#) index in Table 1 (e.g., [29]) reported a lack of association between RS and QoL, but recorded an indirect relationship when a third party is involved (IWD caregivers). Nagpel and colleagues concluded that the spirituality of a caregiver of IWD may influence perceptions of QoL among IWD. Another study coded in the ‘no association’ category (e.g., [22]) reveals that prayer (as an activity of RS) is not directly associated with improvement in QoL, except when moderated by attachment to God (having a relationship with God). The study by Bradshaw and Kent suggests that without a relationship with God the frequency of prayer is ineffective in terms of improvements in psychological well-being. These indirect associations reflect the complexity of the positive relationship between RS and QoL, showing that the effects of RS on QoL may be dependent on other factors and activities of RS that translate into better health outcomes. Our findings support the salutary effects of RS on QoL, be it through direct or indirect associations, as shown in Table 1.

Negative association between RS and QoL

As shown in Table 1, three (15%) studies with 10,112 participants reported inverse associations between RS and QoL [66, 67, 73]. Sorensen et al. [66] report that the prevalence of RS in terms of ‘seeking God’s help’ was negatively associated with sexual QoL, although this relationship was not retained when controlled for other factors such as gender, age, anxiety, neuroticism, extraversion, follow-up time, daily smoking, infrequent exercise, negative outlook, and positive outlook.

Yun et al. [67] report that the RS of terminally ill Korean cancer patients showed a significantly worse survival of insomnia and change in health-related QoL subscales. Yun and colleagues examined the health outcomes of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) among users and non-users. In comparing CAM users and non-CAM users, they found that CAM users did not have better survival ratio than nonusers. Prayer was identified as an aspect of CAM, but results showed worst insomnia survival and cognitive functioning for terminally ill cancer patients who use it as a religious coping behaviour, compared to that of nonusers. Yun et al. concluded that CAM use is associated to worst health outcomes, even though some patients often used CAM in the hope that it will cure their illness. Yun et al. also pointed to the limitations of the study as the possible reasons for the results. First, they note that it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the results due to the nonrandomized design used for data collection. Secondly, they reasoned that due to the small sample size used for the analysis of CAM subcategories (e.g. meditation, prayer therapy, music therapy, art therapy, yoga, horticultural therapy), the statistical power might have been too weak to detect benefits of CAM use.

Levin [73] reports that RS in terms of prayer was negatively related to physical health QoL among Jewish respondents age 50 and above [73]. In the unadjusted model, prayer was negatively correlated to self-rated health, but positively associated with physical symptoms, poor physical functioning, and activity limitation. Adjusting for covariates (e.g., age group, gender differences, education background, relationship status, and birth place) and mediators (e.g., drinking, smoking, and help received from outside the home), the frequency of prayer retained its negative association with self-rated health, and positively correlated with physical symptoms, poor physical functioning, and activity limitation. In contrast, Synagogue participation had a better physical health outcome for Jewish respondents who seem to have a strong attachment to the Synagogue. According to Levin, the dynamics of Jewish spirituality may explain the negative relationship between prayer and physical health since it comparatively has to do with integration into a synagogue community than it does with using prayer as a coping mechanism. As Levin suggests, both findings may in part result from the effects of preventing Synagogue participation and focusing on using prayer as a religious coping behaviour, since “certain expression of religiousness may decline with poor health (e.g., synagogue attendance) and others may increase as a coping response (e.g., prayer)” ([73]: 598).

No association between RS and QoL

As shown in Table 1, the results reveal that five (25%) studies showed no direct association between aspects of RS and outcomes of QoL [22, 29, 30, 71, 75], even though two of these studies (i.e., [22, 29]) later reported an indirect association between RS and QoL via psychosocial factors such as secure attachment to God and perceived social support from caregivers who have a relationship with God. In addition, participants in three of these studies had serious illnesses, ranging from dementia [29], cardiac arrest [30], and breast cancer [71], while data from the two other studies [22, 75] were also retrieved from health-related contexts. This connotes that the lack of association in the illness context between RS and physical health-related QoL may be due to the salutary effects of RS, which provide comfort but do not change the physical status of the patients. In contrast, RS was strongly correlated with psychological functioning, as shown in other studies (e.g., [62, 64]).

It is possible that the different results in terms of the positive, negative, indirect or not detected associations between RS and QoL could be due to conceptualisation and operationalisation of key variables and different study designs (see Table 2). For example, most of the ‘no association’ studies used health-specific QoL measures to assess the physical health domain of participants. Nepgal et al. [29] examined QoL using the Quality of Life Alzheimer’s Disease Scale (QoL-AD); Miller et al. [30] used a Heart-disease specific QoL questionnaire; the same approach was taken by Nguyen et al. [75]. Studies that showed ‘positive association’ (e.g., [27, 28, 63, 68, 74]) mostly employed cross-sectional designs which make it impossible to make firm claims about causality in the IR. However, it is also possible that the estimated effects of aspects of RS on outcomes of QoL are conditional upon each other, e.g., that the effects of RS that are perceived as both positive (e.g., seeking spiritual support) and negative (e.g., spiritual discontent) religious coping emotions and behaviours could be especially consequential for QoL outcomes. These complex patterns warrant further investigation.

Identifying emerging themes

This section identifies themes used in conceptualising RS and QoL. First, we examine themes used in all the studies for examining RS as a domain of QoL that relate to spiritual functioning and a relational dynamic in terms of attachment with a symbolic sacred object or figure via implicit relational conduits. Second, we further identify themes used for the conceptualisation of QoL in all the studies as aspects of individual needs satisfaction with key areas of life that contribute to overall wellbeing.

Meanings of RS

Although the study data contain different definitions of RS as shown in Table 2, it still conveys similar relational ideas of attachment to the sacred (e.g., [22, 27, 76]). The meanings attached to these relational experiences serve as sources of strength and comfort in one’s life [62], taking the form of private spiritual activities that draw one closer to the sacred [63], and a personal relationship with a power greater than one’s self or the spiritual part of one’s life [22, 72]. RS was also commonly interpreted as ‘subjective religiosity’ [28, 29, 70], ‘intrinsic religiosity’ [63], ‘experiential and consequential religiosity’ [30], ‘spiritual connection’ [27], ‘attachment to God’ [22], ‘spiritual functioning’ [68], ‘God image representations’ [76], spiritual behaviours and views [71], and as an aspect of spiritual functioning that has to do with forgiveness of self and others [68].

In addition, most of the studies referred to RS as a frequency of ‘prayer’ or as a form of spiritual transcendence that is achieved through private prayer (e.g., [29, 30, 64, 67, 71, 73, 75]). However, Bradshaw and Kent [22] interpreted RS differently as an attachment to God experience achieved through prayer. Nolan et al. [65] saw RS as a connection to the sacred that is facilitated through the context of a faith community. This is similar to the findings of Nagpal et al. [29] and Ai et al. [64] who also stressed the role played by psychosocial factors in terms of perceived social support and community prayer services in their conceptualisation of RS. One study [69] had a vague definition of RS as ‘feelings of comfort and strength’, even though this generally suggests an idea of spiritual functioning.

Levin [73] presents a different understanding of RS which considers the intersection of religion and place as a conceptualisation of Jewish RS, which is formed within the context of the Synagogue experience. Different RS themes and perspectives were identified in the selected studies. As shown in Table 2, the results from these studies are likely to be influenced by the different conceptualisation used by respective researchers. In addition, the results from the studies may also be linked to an operationalisation problem since RS was assessed based on a variety of designs. For example, some studies measured the RS construct using unstandardized subjective ratings of religiosity (e.g., [29, 62, 75]), while other studies (e.g., [22, 30, 63, 74]) measured RS using psychometric assessments such as The Spiritual and Religious Concerns questionnaire, The Religiosity Measure, Religious coping Activities Scale, Attachment to God Scale, Brief Trust/Mistrust in God Scale, Jewish Religious Coping Scale (JCOPE), Duke Religion Index.

Domains of QoL

Results on aspects of QoL reported in all the studies are presented in Table 2. Aspects of QoL assessed in some of the studies were not clearly defined, even though the concepts used to describe QoL corroborate our theoretical assumptions. All the reviewed studies assessed several QoL domains that include psychological, physical, social, and spiritual functioning, while few studies seem to integrate other health-related factors as aspects of QoL. For example, we observed that a number of studies conceptualised QoL in terms of a single indicator such as depressive symptoms (e.g., [62, 63, 70, 76]), fatigue symptoms (e.g., [64]), and levels of anxiety (e.g., [63]). As expected, these unconventional definitions led to using instruments that are not necessarily designed for measuring QoL, such as the Fatigue Scale, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire. However, two QoL aspects (i.e., psychological functioning and physical health) are the most researched domain of QoL in medical-health research, as all the studies assessed either one or both aspects.

Interestingly, Calvo et al. [70] took a more holistic approach in their examination of QoL, as they investigated physical health, psychological functioning, and other aspects of QoL that are related to social well-being, spiritual functioning, and financial aspects among Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis patients. Canada et al. [69] integrated aspects of mental functioning, physical functioning, and spiritual functioning in their study of faith and QoL of cancer survivors. As shown in Table 2, most of the QoL scales used in selected studies were modified, based on specific cases of interest, such as the HIV/AIDS-Targeted QoL (e.g., [27]), Geriatric QoL-dementia (GQOL-D) [28], QoL – Alzheimer’s Disease Scale (e.g., [29]), Heart-disease Specific QoL Scale (e.g., [30]), McGill QoL Questionnaire (e.g., [70]), Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales (e.g., [69]), World Health Organisation QoL Scale (WHOQoL-BREF) (e.g., Currier et al. [68], and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire (e.g., [67]). Other assessment techniques were based on designing categorical variables (e.g., nominal, dichotomous, or ordinal) on subjective ratings of questions connected to aspects of health-related QoL that may have health implications for the participants (e.g., [66, 72, 73]).

Discussion

Among the most important findings has been the fairly consistent positive correlation between RS and QoL. This finding contrasts with the classical thesis which underestimates the continuing social influence of religion on healthcare, as religion can sometime be perceived as involving moral restrictions that contribute to guilt and, hence, negative emotions that predispose to depression and poor QoL [57]. As presented in Tables 1 and 2, our review of the association between QoL and RS reveals the following:

  1. I)

    There is good evidence that RS is associated with better outcomes of QoL in the areas of physical health, psychological wellbeing, social relationship quality, and spiritual functioning.

  2. II)

    The effects of RS on QoL may take the form of direct and/or indirect associations, depending on the psychosocial factors (e.g., perceived social support by fellow members of the church, a religious caregiver, or group prayer services) and contexts (e.g., illness, secular, or religious) involved.

  3. III)

    The effects of RS on QoL may depend on the right application of meaning in terms of how it is defined (conceptualisation) and measured (operationalisation).

  4. IV)

    RS coping activities and beliefs (e.g., trusting in God, prayer, positive spiritual connections, or forgiving self and others) activate coping strategies during times of distress, leading to better outcomes of QoL.

These findings highlight the significance of RS as an important component for negotiating day-to-day QoL. While most of the studies identify RS as a form of coping strategy with health benefits, in 75% of the reviewed studies (*** and #*), others showed the role of perceived social support in enhancing the effects of RS on QoL via caregivers who are religious [29], being part of a faith community [64], or seeking spiritual support and collaborative religious coping through community prayer services [65]. Psychosocial activities that include practices of RS became a helpful coping recourse for achieving better QoL and played a major role in the way participants experienced spirituality and negotiated their QoL.

The role of prayer in moderating the effects of RS is also noteworthy in the IR (e.g. [22, 64, 75]). Prayer was often used by the participants as a spiritual conduit for assessing the sacred and an important aspect of RS, with studies referring to ‘prayer’ as a form of religious coping behaviour. Overall, prayer was the most commonly used aspect of religious coping behaviour among older adults, and was positively associated with cognitive, behavioural and psychological changes.

However, religious coping behaviour may not be used as a coping therapy in every context, as demonstrated in studies conducted within the illness context (e.g., Miller et al.; [29, 30, 71, 75]), secular context (e.g., [66]), and religious context (e.g., [28, 73]), which highlight this shift in perspective. First, we see this shift in health-specific studies (except for [74]) reporting on a variety of patients (e.g., dementia, cardiac arrest, and breast cancer patients), which found that RS was not related to physical health QoL. This suggests that even though RS may have provided comfort, it does not necessarily change the physical health status of the patients. Second, we also found that the same applies for participants in the secular Norwegian context (e.g., [66]) whose RS did not translate to better health outcomes.

Third, another study (e.g., [28]) also support that the effects of RS on QoL is context-driven, and may be different depending on individual religious background, or how RS is practiced as in the case of Jewish participants (i.e., [73]) whose integration into the Synagogue community was a significant predictor of better physical health than their prayer life. Moon and Kim reported that spirituality accounted for the variance in QoL among Korean Protestants and Catholics, but not for the Buddhist sample. One interpretation given for this result was that “Buddhists usually attend religious meetings less regularly than Protestant or Catholics” ([28]: 298), and that Buddhists had lower RS outcomes than Protestants and Catholics. These different perspectives suggest varying accounts of the salutary effects of RS on QoL, which seem to vary based on the individual’s social context. In other words, even though RS may have provided symbolic beneficial experiences (e.g., a sense of meaning, social support, and spiritual connection) that are good for negotiating QoL, these health benefits can also be because of other sources such as the social context that affect the spiritual role. To better understand the role of RS on health outcomes, we need to consider the “ways in which culture influences religion’s expression of the spiritual” ([77]: S54).

This IR has shown the discrepancies in themes used to describe RS and QoL over the last 10 years. Table 2 shows the different themes associated with all the studies, although the various conceptualisations still point to some sort of relational dynamics that involve attachment to the sacred and aspects of spiritual functioning. Of the 20 studies identified, none exclusively used the term “relational spirituality”, even though the conceptualisations bear semblance with our definitions of RS. The specific terms used in describing RS in most of the studies are “religion”, “religiosity”, “faith”, “spirituality”, “complementary therapy”, “private prayer”, “religious coping”, “attachment to God”, “seeking God’s help”, “Jewish spirituality”, and “images of God.” In using these terms, most of the studies failed to clearly define RS as a relational dynamic that deals with attachment to the sacred. Instead, they used measures and categorical variables that assess aspects of RS that involve intrinsic aspects, such as meditation, prayer, and attachment to a higher power. Conceptually, RS continues to change while retaining the relational dynamic of its tradition.

At present, an attachment-based model of RS, though achieved through prayer and other religious-related activities with others and positive perceptions of the divine, seems to be the overriding theme in studies examining RS and QoL over the past 10 years. God image representations and trust/mistrust in God as seen in the works of Krause et al. [76] and Krumrai et al. [74] also re-emphasize similar relational perspectives, along with other studies which demonstrate a similar attachment-religion connection. These conceptualisations are likely because of the operation of Bowlby’s [43] proposed internal working models of attachment which, even though developed during the early years of life, remain active in one’s lifespan attachment development [44] and determine the extent to which a potential object of attachment is experienced, even in the RS context (e.g., [13, 16, 37]).

Long [78] found a significant correlation between measures of attachment to God RS, parental bonding, and religious coping. The ability to regulate emotional states in RS contexts due to the internal working model of the attachment system may be the very key to unfolding spiritual coping model for negotiating QoL when drawn to the sacred. The direct and/or indirect associations with QoL suggest the activation of a spiritual coping model that helps in relational processes and in dealing with stressful life situations, based on the connection to what is transcendent. The idea of the transcendent can take different directions, as shown in our IR as spiritual functioning, forgiving self, forging a meaningful relationship with others, and building a sense of attachment to God. This framework of a spiritual coping model is more active in the third aspect in terms of the association between RS and QoL.

The limitations across these 20 studies include the following: mostly focused on older adults with younger people unrepresented; mostly quantitative design which lacks in-depth perspectives capture; mostly cross-sectional studies with limited causality examination; lack of QoL specific measures; and the use of categorical rather than continuous operationalization of RS and QoL.

Although study findings show evidence of the links between RS and QoL in medical-health research for the last decade, we were unable to retrieve some studies related to RS and QoL during our initial literature search due to indexing problems and date of publication. After conducting a manual search of related articles reporting on the links between RS and QoL, we found some related studies (e.g., [16, 37, 79,80,81,82,83]), but were not able to report them because they were either not indexed in the selected databases (i.e., PubMed, ScienceDirect, and PsycINFO), using a different conceptualisation of QoL (e.g., levels of emotional distress), or were published after our deadline of literature search (i.e., March 2017). However, the results from these “missing” studies also support the salutary effects of an attachment-based model of RS on levels of psychological wellbeing. We are confident that the studies selected for this IR are good representatives of relevant studies published within the past 10 years demonstrating how RS has been perceived/positioned in relation to QoL.

Conclusion

The findings from this review have broad implications for the role of RS in relation to QoL in medical-health contexts. Existing models of RS coping are better understood by integrating spiritually-based perspectives that include identifying aspects of faith and individual life that may be understood as a contextual ‘biopsychosocial spirituality’ [64]. Greater awareness of the importance of RS among healthcare professionals may improve cultural competence in healthcare services and community support in addressing patient’s spirituality, and strengthen collaborative relationship between healthcare and faith-based organizations. Further research on the relation between RS and QoL should be conducted across different population and health contexts.

Notes

  1. Health Science Descriptors

  2. Medical Subject Headings

  3. Table 1 explores and summarizes the general categories of the articles in terms of the study characteristics.

  4. Table 2 contains themes and meanings that emerge from the studies for describing the link between RS and QoL.

References

  1. Barbarin OA. Coping with resilience: exploring the inner lives of African American children. J Black Psychol. 1993;19:478–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hefti R. Integrating religion and spirituality into mental health care, psychiatry and psychotherapy. Religions. 2011;2:611–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Charney DS, Southwick SM. Resilience: the Science of Mastering Life's Greatest Challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  4. McCarroll P, O’Connor TJ, Meakes E. Assessing plurality in spirituality definitions. In: Meier A, O’Connor TJ, Van Katwyk PL, editors. Spirituality and health: multidisciplinary explorations. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press; 2005. p. 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Benson PL, Roehlkepartain EC, Rude SP. Spiritual development in childhood and adolescence: toward a field of inquiry. Appl Dev Sci. 2003;7:205–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Piedmont RL. Does spirituality represent the sixth factor of personality? Spiritual transcendence and the five-factor model. J Pers. 1999;67:986–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Koenig HG, McCullough ME, Larson DB. Handbook of religion and health. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Koenig HG, George LK, Titus P. Religion, spirituality, and health in medically ill hospitalized older patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;52(4):554–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Efficace F, Marrone R. Spiritual issues and quality of life assessment in cancer care. Death Studies. 2002;26:743–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horton R. Differences in assessment of symptoms and quality of life between patients with advanced cancer and their specialist palliative care nurses in a home care setting. Palliat Med. 2002;16(6):488–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bensley RJ. Defining spiritual health: a review of the literature. J Health Educ. 1991;22:287–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Counted V. God as an attachment figure: a case study of the god attachment language and god concepts of anxiously attached Christian youths in South Africa. J Spirituality in Mental Health. 2016;18(4):316–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Granqvist P, Kirkpatrick LA. Attachment and religious representations and behaviour. In: Cassidy J, Shaver PR, editors. Handbook of attachment: theory, research, and clinical applications. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford; 2016. p. 917–40.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tomlinson J, Glenn ES, Paine DR, Sandage SJ. What is the “relational” in relational spirituality? a review of definitions and research directions. J Spirit Mental Health. 2016;16(1):55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Davis EB, Moriarty GL, Mauch JC. God images and god concepts: definitions, development, and dynamics. Psychol Religion and Spirituality. 2013;5:51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hall TW. Christian spirituality and mental health: a relational spirituality paradigm for empirical research. J Psychol Christ. 2004;23:66–81.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Meade T, Dowswell E. Adolescents’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes over time: a three-year longitudinal study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Chiu YW, Moore RW, Hsu CE, Huang CT, Liu HW, Chuang HY. Factors influencing women's quality of life in the later half of life. Climacteric. 2008;11(3):201–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Puder J, Pinto AM, Bonvin A, Bodenman P, Munsch S, Kriemler S, et al. Health-related quality of life in migrant preschool children. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:384.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhicui Y, Shan L, Ying P. Quality of life of urban migrant children and construction of its social support model. Theory and Practice of Contemporary Education. 2009;1(2):136–8.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Suzuki M, Ohyama N, Yamada K, Kanamori M. The relationship between fear of falling, activities of daily living and quality of life among elderly individuals. Nurs Health Sci. 2002;4:155–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bradshaw M, Kent BV. Prayer, attachment to god, and changes in psychological well-being in later life. J Aging and Health. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264316688116

  23. Rahman T, Mittelhammer R, Wandschneider P. Measuring quality of life across countries: a multiple indicators and multiple causes approach. Journal of Socio-Economics. 2011;40(1):43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lowe G. High-quality healthcare workplaces: a vision and action plan. Hospital Quarterly. 2002;(2): 49-56

  25. Cimete G, Gencalp NS, Keskin G. Quality of life and job satisfaction of nurses. J Nurs Care Qual. 2003;18(2):151–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Roberts L, Clifton R. Measuring the cognitive domain of the quality of student life: an instrument for faculties of education. Can J Educ. 1992;17(2):176–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee M, Nezu AM, Nezu CM. Positive and negative religious coping, depressive symptoms, and quality of life in people with HIV. J. Behav. Med. 2014;37(5):921–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Moon YS, Kim DH. Association between religiosity/spirituality and quality of life or depression among living alone elderly in a south Korean city. Asia-Pacific Psychiatry. 2013;5(4):293–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nagpal N, Heid AR, Zarit SH, Whitlatch CJ. Religiosity and quality of life: a dyadic perspective of individuals with dementia and their caregivers. Journal of Aging and Mental Health. 2014;19(6):500–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Miller FJ, McConnell TR, Klinger TA. Religiosity and spirituality: influence on quality of life and perceived patient self-efficacy among cardiac patients and their spouses. Journal of Religion Health. 2007;46:299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hacker ED. Quantitative measurement of quality of life in adult patients undergoing bone marrow transplant or peripheral blood stem cell transplant: a decade in review. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2003;30(4):613–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson K, Dowling A, Abdolell M, Tannock I. Perception of quality of life by patients, partners, and treating physicians. Qual Life Res. 2001;9:1041–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Marshall P. Cultural influences on perceived quality of life. Semin Oncol Nurs. 1990;6(4):278–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rule S. Religiosity and quality of life in South Africa. Soc Indic Res. 2007;81(2):417–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Collinge A, Rudell K, Bhui K. Quality of life assessment in non-western cultures. Int. Rev. Psychiatry. 2002;14(3):212–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. O'Connell KA, Skevington SM. Spiritual, religious, and personal beliefs are important and distinctive to assessing quality of life in health: a comparison of theoretical models. British J Health Psych. 2009;00:1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Augustyn BD, Hall TW, Wang DC, Hill PC. Relational spirituality: an attachment-based model of spiritual development and psychological well-being. Psychol Religion and Spirituality. 2017;9(2):197–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Goldstein S. The parallel paths of psychoanalysis and spirituality: convergences, divergences, transformation. Psychoanalytic. Perspectives. 2012;6(1):45–66.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mack JE. Psychoanalysis of the self: toward a spiritual point of view. In: Rouner LS, editor. Selves, people, and persons? Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press; 1992. p. 169–86.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Fairbairn WRD. Psychoanalytic studies of the personality. London: Tavistock; 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rizzuto AM. The birth of the living god: a psychoanalytical study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Winnicott DW. Playing and reality. Middlesex: Penguin Books; 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bowlby J. Attachment. Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Loss. New York: Basic Books; 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Cicirelli VG. God as the ultimate attachment figure for older adults. Attach Hum. Dev. 2004;6(4):371–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Granqvist P, Milkulincer M, Gewirtz V, Shaver PR. Experimental findings on god as an AF: normative processes and moderating effects of internal working models. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012;103:804–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Hale SA. Global developmental trend in cognitive processing speed. Child Dev. 1990;61:653–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Diamond A, Goldman-Rakic PS. Comparison of human infants and rhesus monkeys on Piaget's AB task: evidence for dependence on dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Exp Brain Res. 1989;74:24–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Fischer B, Biscaldi M, Gezeck S. On the development of voluntary and reflexive components in human saccade generation. Brain Res. 1997;754:285–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Luna B, Garver KE, Urban TA, Lazar NA, Sweeney JA. Maturation of cognitive processes from late childhood to adulthood. Child Development 2004. 2004;75(5):1357–72.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kirkpatrick LA, Shaver PR. Attachment theory and religion: childhood attachments, religious beliefs, and conversion. J Sci Study Relig. 1990;29:315–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sloan R, Bagiella E. Claims about religious involvement and health outcomes. Ann Behav Med. 2002;24:14–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sloan R, Bagiella E, Powell T. Without a prayer: methodological problems, ethical challenges, and misrepresentations in the study of religion, spirituality, and medicing. In: Plante TG, Sherman AC, editors. Faith and health: psychological perspectives. New York: Guilford Press; 2001. p. 339–54.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Miller WR, Thoresen CE. Spirituality, religion, and health: an emerging research field. Am Psychol. 2003;58:24–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Chamberlain TJ, Hall CA. Realized religion. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Larson DB, Larson SS. Spirituality’s potential relevance to physical and emotional health: a brief review of quantitative research. Journal of Psychology and Theology. 2003;31:37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Abdala GA, Kimura M, Koenig HG, Reinert KG, Horton K. Religiosity and quality of life in older adults: literature review. LifeStyle. Journal. 2016;2(2):25–51.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Bonelli RM, Koenig HG. Mental disorders, religion and spirituality 1990 to 2010: a systematic evidence-based review. J Relig Health. 2013;52(2):657–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Crossetti MGO. Revisão integrativa de pesquisa na enfermagem o rigor cientifico que lhe é exigido (Integrative review of nursing research: scientific rigor required) [editorial]. Rev Gaúcha Enferm. Porto Alegre (RS). 2012;33(2):12–3.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52(5):546–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Torraco RJ. Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2005;4:356–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Webster J, Watson RT. Analysing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Q. 2002;26(2):xiii–xii.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Idler LE, McLaughlin J, Kasl S. Religion and the quality of life in the last year of life. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2009;64B(4):528–37.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Saffari M, Pakpour AH, Naderi MK, Koenig HG, Baldacchino DR, Piper CN. Spiritual coping, religiosity and quality of life: a study on Muslim patients undergoing haemodialysis. Nephrology. 2013;18(4):269–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Ai A, Corley CS, Peterson C, Huang B, Tice TN. Private prayer and quality of life in cardiac patients: pathways of cognitive coping and social support. Social Work Health Care. 2009;48(4):471–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Nolan JA, McEvoy JP, Koenig HG, Hooten EG, Whetten K, Pieper CF. Religious coping and quality of life among individuals living with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2012;63(10):1051–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Sorensen T, Dahl AA, Fossa SD, Holmen J, Lien L, Danbolt LJ. Is seeking God's help associated with life satisfaction and disease-specific quality of life in cancer patients? The hunt study. Arch Psychol Relig. 2012;34:191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. YH, Lee MK, Park SM, Kim YA, Lee WJ, Lee KS, Choi JS, Hung KH, Do YR, Kim SY, Heo DS, Kim HT, Park SR. Effect of complementary and alternative medicine on the survival and health-related quality of life among terminally ill cancer patients: a prospective cohort study. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(2):489–94.

  68. Currier JM, Drescher KD, Holland JM, Lisman R, Foy DW. Spirituality, forgiveness, and quality of life. Int. J. Psychol. Relig. 2015;28(1):57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Canada AL, Murphy PE, Fitchett G, Stein K. Re-examining the contributions of faith, meaning, and peace to quality of life: a report from the American Cancer Society’s studies of Cancer survivors-II (SCS-II). Ann. Behav. Med. 2015;50(1):79–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Calvo A, Moglia C, Ilardi A, Cammarosano S, Gallo S, Canosa A, et al. Religiousness is positively associated with quality of life of ALS caregivers. Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2011;12(3):168–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Rohani C, Abedi HA, Omranipour R, Langius-Eklöf A. Health-related quality of life and the predictive role of sense of coherence, spirituality and religious coping in a sample of Iranian women with breast cancer: a prospective study with comparative design. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Kashdan TB, Nezlek JB. Whether, when, and how is spirituality related to well-being? Moving beyond single occasion questionnaires to understanding daily process. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2012;38(11):1523–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Levin J. Religion and physical health among older Israeli Jews: findings from the SHARE-Israel study. Isr. Med. Assoc. J. 2012;14(10):595–601.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Krumrei EJ, Pirutinsky S, Rosmarin DH. Jewish spirituality, depression, and health: an empirical test of a conceptual framework. Int. J. Behav. Med. 2013;20(3):327–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Nguyen HT, Grzywacz JG, Lang W, Walkup M, Arcury TA. Effects of complementary therapy on health in a national U.S. sample of older adults. J Altern Complement Med. 2010;16(7):701–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Krause N, Emmons RA, Ironson G. Benevolent images of god, gratitude, and physical health status. J. Relig. Health. 2015;54(4):1503–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Eckersley RM. Culture, spirituality, religion and health: looking at the big picture. Med J Aust. 2007;186:S54–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lang A. Az Istenhez való kötődés és a vallásos megküzdés szerepe az élettel való elégedettségben. [Impact of attachment to God and religious coping on life satisfaction]. Orv Hetil. 2013;154(46):1843–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Bradshaw M, Ellison CG, Marcum JP. Attachment to god, images of god, and psychological distress in a Nationwide sample of Presbyterians. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. 2010;20(2):130–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Ellison CG, Bradshaw M, Flannelly KJ, Galek KC. Prayer, attachment to god, and symptoms of anxiety-related disorders among U.S. adults. Sociol Relig. 2014;75(2):208–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Kent BV, Bradshaw M, Uecker JE. Forgiveness, attachment to god, and mental health outcomes in older U.S, Adults: A longitudinal study; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027517706984.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Miner M. The impact of child–parent attachment, attachment to god and religious orientation on psychological adjustment. J Psychol Theol. 2009;37(2):114–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Miner M, Dowson M, Malone K. Attachment to god, psychological need satisfaction, and psychological well-being among Christians. J Psychol Theol. 2014;42(4):326–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the School of Social Sciences and Psychology, Western Sydney University, NSW, Australia.

Availability of data and materials

References of all data generated or analysed during this study are included in the reference list of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Sciences and Psychology, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia

    Victor Counted, Adam Possamai & Tanya Meade

Authors
  1. Victor Counted
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam Possamai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tanya Meade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

VC drafted the initial version of article and contributed in designing the study, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of the data, critical revision of the manuscript, and final approval of the article. PA contributed to the data interpretation, critical revision of the article, and final approval of the version to be published. TM contributed to the conception of the review, data analysis and interpretation, critical revision of the article, and final approval of the version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victor Counted.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Counted, V., Possamai, A. & Meade, T. Relational spirituality and quality of life 2007 to 2017: an integrative research review. Health Qual Life Outcomes 16, 75 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0895-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-018-0895-x

Keywords

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us