Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background/Objectives: Religious engagement may coexist with low existential well-being. We identified spiritual-religious profiles in Romanian patients with cancer, assessed their associations with distress and quality of life, and evaluated spirituality's incremental predictive value. Methods: This single-centre cross-sectional study included 175 adults with cancer. Latent profile analysis used FACIT-Sp Meaning, Peace, and Faith, Religious Commitment Inventory-10, and service attendance. Clinically significant distress was defined as Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety or depression scores ≥8. Adjusted regression and a six-predictor logistic model with bootstrap internal validation were used. Results: Three profiles emerged: low spiritual-religious resource (n = 61), religiously engaged but existentially unsettled (n = 52), and integrated spiritual-religious resource (n = 62). Distress prevalence was 68.9%, 61.5%, and 25.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared with the low-resource profile, the integrated profile had lower adjusted odds of distress (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08–0.44), higher global quality of life (adjusted difference 14.1 points, 95% CI 4.4–23.8), and lower symptom burden (−11.8 points, 95% CI −18.6 to −5.0). The full model had an apparent AUC of 0.816 (95% CI 0.748–0.875) and an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.789. Its AUC exceeded that of the clinical-only model by 0.064 (95% CI 0.008–0.12; p = 0.023). Conclusions: Religious involvement alone did not indicate resolved spiritual needs. Inner peace may improve distress risk assessment, although prospective external validation is required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nagy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: