Search

In secular cultures, such as Denmark, tools to measure spiritual needs are warranted to guide existential and spiritual care. We examined the clinimetric properties of the Danish version of the Spiritual Needs Questionnaire (DA-SpNQ-20) based on a digital survey in a test–retest setup. A convenience sample was reached via social media and student platforms. A total of 325 (148 for retest) respondents were included in the analysis. The sample was randomly split into two groups (A and B) and used for exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) by structural equation modeling, respectively. SpNQ dimensions had an internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha between 0.73 and 0.93. The four factors of the SpNQ were supported by both EFA and CFA as follows: religious needs, existential needs, inner peace needs, and generativity needs. The instrument showed good internal consistency, good test–retest reliability, and acceptable structural validity in the sample of relatively young and healthy persons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the possible impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on general health, mental well-being, and experiences of control compared to pre-pandemic populations. Our hypotheses were that we would observe a significantly lower level of psychological well-being and general health in the 2020 sample compared to the pre-pandemic samples, and that we would observe younger age groups to be the most affected. Method: Two representative Danish populations (2016, n = 1656) and (2017, n = 3366) were compared to a representative Danish population (2020, n = 1538) sampled during the first lockdown in May 2020. Two-tailed tests of proportions were used to investigate possible differences between samples in proportions reporting poorer mental well-being measured by 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index, general health, and internal locus of control. Results: Younger men (aged 18–24) and younger women (aged 18–44) as well as elderly women (aged 65–74) reported lower mental well-being during the early phase of the pandemic compared to the population from 2016. Both women and men in 2020 reported significantly lower levels of internal locus of control compared to the 2017 sample. This was especially true for younger men and women. There were no statistically significant differences in general health between populations. Discussion: This study partly supports the hypothesis that the Covid-19 pandemic affected mental well-being negatively among younger persons. However, longitudinal studies are needed to investigate possible long-term effects of the pandemic on mental health and well-being. Further, qualitative studies are needed to investigate the in-depth consequences of Covid-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the continuation of the first wave of the Covid-19 outbreak in Denmark, unprecedented restrictions with great impact on the citizen's everyday life were implemented. The objectives of this study were to investigate the influence of the Covid-19 pandemic on mental and physical health in the Danish population during the spring 2020 first wave outbreak and lockdown.Methods: A sample from the adult Danish population (n = 2190) were included. Self-reported measures of illness worry (Whiteley-6-R), emotional distress (SCL-90), and physical symptom load (SLC-90) were obtained before and during the first wave of the pandemic and compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Impact of covariates on physical and mental health was evaluated with ordinal regression analyses. Results from a tailored questionnaire regarding the Covid-19 pandemic were presented to explore the direct impact of the pandemic.Results: We only found minor increases in illness worry, emotional distress and physical symptom load (0-1 points difference, p ≤ 0.007) during the Covid-19 pandemic compared to before the pandemic. Sex, age, education, and physical disease were not associated with illness worry, emotional distress, or physical symptom load. Overall, the participants were trustful in the authorities' recommendations and felt that they managed the pandemic and the restrictions to a great extent despite that some expected great/major future consequences of the pandemic.Conclusions: This study suggested that the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic only had minor impact on mental and physical health in the Danish general population. Future studies should address the impact of the second wave of the pandemic and the renewed implementation of the concomitant restrictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The often touted positive association between religion and wellbeing is mainly based on evidence from cross-sectional studies. This is problematic because such studies tend to draw conclusions at the individual level despite reporting associations at the group level. In addition to this fallacy, inferences at the group level are also likely to be inflated by the social desirability effect, which may further exacerbate misrepresentations of the individual level. To avoid these pitfalls, we examined prayer-wellbeing (P-WB) associations and social desirability effects at both levels, using single-level and multilevel regression analysis on a longitudinal dataset. Weekly reports of prayer and wellbeing from 282 frequently praying Danish Christians, totaling 4254 complete responses, were combined with a comprehensive background questionnaire featuring a social desirability measure targeting the religious domain. A typical weak positive P-WB association was observed at the group level, which disappeared when controlling for social desirability. At the individual level, the average association across individuals was positive after controlling for social desirability. This overall relationship, however, conceals considerable individual variance with almost a fourth of the estimated individual P-WB associations going in the negative direction, emphasizing the need to be cautious when extrapolating group-level data to the individual level. These findings suggest that cross-sectional studies may oversimplify the P-WB relationship, especially, if the social desirability effect is ignored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Dansk Tidsskrift For Teologi Og Kirke is the property of Menighedsfakultetet and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Psychological treatment for functional somatic syndromes (FSS) has been found moderately effective. Information on how much treatment is needed to obtain improvement is sparse. We assessed the efficacy of a brief and extended version of group-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) v. enhanced care (EC) for patients with multiple FSS operationalised as Bodily Distress Syndrome multi-organ type. Methods: In a randomised controlled three-armed trial, consecutively referred patients aged 20–50 with multiple FSS were randomly assigned to either (1) EC; (2) Brief ACT: EC plus 1-day workshop and one individual consultation; or (3) Extended ACT: EC plus nine 3-h group-based sessions. Primary outcome was patient-rated overall health improvement on the five-point clinical global improvement scale 14 months after randomisation. A proportional odds model was used for the analyses. Results: A total of 180 patients were randomised; 60 to EC, 61 to Brief ACT, and 59 to Extended ACT. Improvement on the primary outcome after Extended ACT was significantly greater than after EC with an unadjusted OR of 2.9 [95% CI (1.4–6.2), p = 0.006]. No significant differences were found between Brief ACT and EC. Of the 18 secondary outcomes, the only significant difference found was for physical functioning in the comparison of Extended ACT with EC. Conclusions: Patients rated their overall health status as more improved after Extensive ACT than after EC; however, clinically relevant secondary outcome measures did not support this finding. Discrepancies between primary and secondary outcomes in this trial are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sources of Meaning and Meaning in Life Questionnaire (SoMe) offers dimensional measures of meaningfulness, crisis of meaning, and 26 sources of meaning. It allows for a clearer understanding of the variety of existential orientations, which are known to be linked to both mental and physical health. The Norwegian version of the SoMe was validated by testing 925 randomly selected individuals who were representative for the Norwegian population. Reliability scores were satisfactory; factor analyses suggested a 6-factor structure of the sources of meaning scales. Expected patterns of associations with mental health and quality-of-life factors attested the instrument's construct validity: Meaningfulness showed positive relationships to all quality-of-life factors. There was no relationship with anxiety but negative relationships with depression and distress. Crisis of meaning established a strong positive relationship with anxiety, depression, and distress and a negative relationship with quality-of-life factors. Criterion validity was documented by expected differences in meaningfulness and crisis of meaning between groups with and without presence of depression disorder. Self-efficacy correlated strongly with sources of meaning from the dimension "accomplishment" and moderately negatively with sources of meaning from the dimension "vertical selftranscendence". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents psychometric properties of the Danish version of the Sources of Meaning and Meaning in Life Scale (SoMe‐Da) and associations to socio‐demographic and religious characteristics. Participants were 554 Danes, 66% women ranging in age between 15 and 91 years. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) suggested a five factor structure for the 26 sources if meaning. Construct validity within the SoMe‐Da and between mental health variables were established. Generativity associated most strongly with meaningfulness followed by spirituality, attentiveness, and explicit religiosity. We found religious characteristics to be more strongly associated with meaningfulness than socio‐demographic variables. Finally, we found distinct patterns of preferred sources of meaning between Christians, agnostics, and atheists. Christians and agnostics seemed to be more motivated by self‐transcendance, whereas atheists may be more motivated by self‐actualization. Results indicate that the SoMe‐Da appears to be a valid instrument for measuring the content and degree of personal meaning in life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A correction to the article related to the use of acceptance and commitment group therapy for multiple functional somatic syndromes patients.