Created at 4am, Mar 26
SplinterPsychology
0
Spirituality, Quality of Life, and Health: A Japanese Cross-Sectional Study
Contract ID
RAYEoduX4G0iX-rqprdBH4S0AWUQECyLCyfii7tMxL8
File Type
PDF
Entry Count
73
Embed. Model
jina_embeddings_v2_base_en
Index Type
hnsw

Background: Current reports suggest a positive association between spirituality and quality of life (QoL) in elders. While most studies are qualitative studies and there has been little validation in quantitative studies using scales to measure spirituality. Hence, we aimed to study the effect of spirituality on mental health and QoL in older people residing in Kumejima Town in Japan. Methods: An interview-based survey was conducted between September 2010 and 2011 on residents of Kumejima Town aged 65 years or older. This survey-based study employed the Spirituality Health Scale for the Elderly (SP Health Scale) alongside assessments of basic attributes (e.g., age, sex); physical, mental, social health, spirituality, and QoL. We conducted a causal structure model to explore causal relationships between these factors. Results: Our study included 338 participants, including 72.5% female with an average age and standard deviation of 77.2 ± 6.4 years. Our analysis revealed a significant association between spiritual health and QoL even after accounting for the impact of physical and mental health, which challenged the conventional belief that QoL inevitably diminishes with age and declining health. These results suggest that enhancing spirituality may offer a means to prevent declines in QoL, fostering a positive outlook on life as individuals age. Conclusion: Our study suggests that improving spiritual health can enhance QoL, even in the presence of health challenges and aging. This novel perspective opens doors to redefining health as a state that coexists with illness, with spirituality serving as an integral component. A shift in our understanding of health that prioritizes spirituality, could benefit people of all ages, offering a more holistic approach to well-being that aligns with new medical technologies and evolving perceptions of health.

QoL was split into direct and indirect effects, they were 0.008 and 0.286, respectively. This means that the indirect effect of spirituality on QoL is much larger than the direct effect. The coefficient of determination for QoL as the objective variable in this model was 0.610, indicating that a higher proportion was explained than in Model 1.
id: fa4f738792ac1c33f6154e27dd5ec0bf - page: 7
A comparison of the results of the analysis of Model 1 and Model 2 is presented in Table 8. The AIC was added as an indicator to compare the models. The value of the AIC is 313.67 for Model 2 compared to 330.48 for Model 1. The relative superiority of Model 2 in terms of the coefficient of determination, goodness of fit index, and AIC is shown.
id: 610942fe7f74316ddeef2c1d714892ab - page: 7
In the additional analysis model (Figure 3, Model 3), each confounding factor (family structure and educational background) was controlled as an observed variable, and all observed variables in the model had an effect. After controlling for confounding factors, the results of various goodness-of-fit indices were GFI: 0.938, AGFI: 0.899, CFI: 0.890, and RMSEA: 0.046. The fit of the model was found to be almost the same as hypothesis Model 2. Furthermore, in the relationship between each confounder and all observed variables, many standardized path coefficients were not significant. For these reasons, hypothesis Model 2, in which observed variables as confounding factors were excluded from the model, was adopted as the final model. 773 Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2024, 14 Table 3. Results of covariance structure analysis for hypothesis Model 1 (standardized path coefficients). Path Path Factor Significant Difference Physical health 0.401 Mental health 0.588 **
id: a282c32ac80cdeb85b6fd08349e95539 - page: 7
Social health QoL 0.253 Spirituality 0.116 Disease 0.176 Physical health Mental health Self-awareness Life activities Subjectivity Life satisfaction 0.676 0.113 0.638 0.569 1 1 ** Stress Role in society 0.441 0.423 ** 1 Social health Neighborhood 0.502 ** Going outside 0.467 ** Dying 0.233 ** Nature 0.623 ** Origin 0.715 ** Spirituality Other 0.638 ** Go above and beyond yourself 0.554 ** Joy of living Satisfaction 0.691 0.469 ** 1 QoL Evaluation 0.387 ** Valium 0.533 ** 1 The path to the observed variable is fixed to 1. ** p < 0.01. * p < 0.05. Table 4. Effects of the dependent variable for hypothesis Model 1 (direct and total effects). Dependent Variable Independent Variables Direct Effects Indirect Effects Overall Effects QoL Physical health 0.401 0.401 Mental health 0.588 0.588 Social Health 0.253 0.253 Spirituality 0.116 0.116 Table 5. Main goodness-of-fit indicators for hypothesis Model 2.
id: 7ae8c93b19ae10cf16236c78a2553990 - page: 8
How to Retrieve?
# Search

curl -X POST "https://search.dria.co/hnsw/search" \
-H "x-api-key: <YOUR_API_KEY>" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"rerank": true, "top_n": 10, "contract_id": "RAYEoduX4G0iX-rqprdBH4S0AWUQECyLCyfii7tMxL8", "query": "What is alexanDRIA library?"}'
        
# Query

curl -X POST "https://search.dria.co/hnsw/query" \
-H "x-api-key: <YOUR_API_KEY>" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"vector": [0.123, 0.5236], "top_n": 10, "contract_id": "RAYEoduX4G0iX-rqprdBH4S0AWUQECyLCyfii7tMxL8", "level": 2}'