Discrepancies between the medical record and the reports of patients with acute coronary syndrome regarding important aspects of the medical history

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many critical treatment decisions are based on the medical history of patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Discrepancies between the medical history documented by a health professional and the patient's own report may therefore have important health consequences.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Medical histories of 117 patients with an ACS were documented. A questionnaire assessing the patient's health history was then completed by 62 eligible patients. Information about 13 health conditions with relevance to ACS management was obtained from the questionnaire and the medical record. Concordance between these two sources and reasons for discordance were identified.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There was significant variation in agreement, from very poor in angina (kappa < 0) to almost perfect in diabetes (kappa = 0.94). Agreement was substantial in cerebrovascular accident (kappa = 0.76) and hypertension (kappa = 0.73); moderate in cocaine use (kappa = 0.54), smoking (kappa = 0.46), kidney disease (kappa = 0.52) and congestive heart failure (kappa = 0.54); and fair in arrhythmia (kappa = 0.37), myocardial infarction (kappa = 0.31), other cardiovascular diseases (kappa = 0.37) and bronchitis/pneumonia (kappa = 0.31). The odds of agreement was 42% higher among individuals with at least some college education (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.00 - 2.01, p = 0.053). Listing of a condition in medical record but not in the questionnaire was a common cause of discordance.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Discrepancies in aspects of the medical history may have important effects on the care of ACS patients. Future research focused on identifying the most effective and efficient means to obtain accurate health information may improve ACS patient care quality and safety.</p

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

Introduction to the Special Issue: The Study of Religious and Spiritual Struggles: An Interdisciplinary Endeavor

Religious and spiritual (r/s) struggles are relatively common human experiences and refer to pain, anger, fear, doubt, or confusion related to religious and spiritual beliefs, experiences, and practices (Exline 2013; Pargament et al [...

Addressing unhealthy and potentially harmful expressions of religiousness and spirituality in clinical practice.

© 2016 American Psychological Association. Mental health professionals are often reluctant to label the religious and spiritual lives of their clients as unhealthy or harmful. Indeed, professional codes of conduct require that clinicians respect the religious and spiritual values of their clients and at the same time provide clients with ethical and efficacious mental health care. Accordingly, clinicians must consider a framework for assessing and addressing religion and spirituality that acknowledges and protects the worldviews of their clients without disrespecting expressions of religiousness and spirituality. This framework must also accurately label maladaptive thoughts and behaviors so that effective intervention may be implemented. Such a framework must be consistent with a scientific understanding of human behavior, while also respecting the moral values provided by religious and spiritual traditions. This article describes two useful strategies to assist clinicians in assessing and addressing unhealthy and potentially harmful expressions of religiousness and spirituality in psychotherapy. The authors also provide examples and case illustrations of common ethical concerns, as well as techniques for working through these concerns, to maximize clinician competency and client welfare

Original article Sense of coherence: big five correlates, spirituality, and incremental validity

Background Antonovsky (1987) developed the Sense of Coherence (SOC) scale to measure the “life orientation” that promotes an individual’s ability to recognize life stressors and then effectively utilize coping resources to adjust and maintain health. Although theoretically appealing, little empirical work has been conducted to isolate the qualities of the scale that facilitate health. Participants and procedure The present study examined the factor structure of the SOC scale, as well as its incremental validity over measures of personality, spirituality, and psychological meaning in the prediction of psychosocial outcomes (e.g., hope death anxiety, life satisfaction, well-being, social support, world view). Participants consisted of 298 adults living in the United States; 98 men and 195 women (5 individuals did not disclose their gender) ages 18 to 72 (mean: 36.77 years). Results Principal components analysis indicated that a single factor best represented the structure of the 13-item SOC scale, although this one factor explained only 31% of the total variance. The scale contained a diverse item content that was challenging to interpret personologically. The SOC scale added little explanatory variance over and above the selected covariates in the prediction of psychosocial outcomes. Conclusions It appears that the SOC scale represents one aspect of a larger dimension that already has other valid indicators