PubMed · 16923400
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
John matt Dorn. 2006. Intercessory prayer.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2006.05.026
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This article (a) discusses the definition of faith-based substance abuse treatment programs, (b) juxtaposes Durkheim's theory regarding religion with treatment process model to highlight key dimensions of faith-based and traditional programs, and (c) presents results from a study of seven programs to identify key program dimensions and to identify differences/similarities between program types. Focus group/Concept Mapping techniques yielded a clear "spiritual activities, beliefs, and rituals" dimension, rated as significantly more important to faith-based programs. Faith-based program staff also rated "structure and discipline" as more important and "work readiness" as less important. No differences were found for "group activities/cohesion" and "role modeling/mentoring," "safe, supportive environment," and "traditional treatment modalities." Programs showed substantial similarities with regard to core social processes of treatment such as mentoring, role modeling, and social cohesion. Implications are considered for further research on treatment engagement, retention, and other outcomes.
Among the many recent attempts to demonstrate the medical benefits of religious activity, the methodologically strongest seem to be studies of the effects of distant intercessory prayer (IP). In these studies, patients are randomly assigned to receive standard care or standard care plus the prayers or "healing intentions" of distant intercessors. Most of the scientific community has dismissed such research, but cavalier rejection of studies of IP is unwise, because IP studies appear to conform to the standards of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and, as such, would have a significant advantage over observational investigations of associations between religious variables and health outcomes. As we demonstrate, however, studies of IP fail to meet the standards of RCTs in several critical respects. They fail to adequately measure and control exposure to prayer from others, which is likely to exceed IP and to vary widely from subject to subject, and whose magnitude is unknown. This supplemental prayer so greatly attenuates the differences between the treatment and control groups that sample sizes are too large to justify studies of IP. Further, IP studies generally do not specify the outcome variables, raising problems of multiple comparisons and Type 1 errors. Finally, these studies claim findings incompatible with current views of the physical universe and consciousness. Unless these problems are solved, studies of IP should not be conducted.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.