In recent years, some within chaplaincy have advocated for a stronger focus on outcomes, including outcome research, whereas others in the field have questioned an outcome-oriented perspective. In this article, existing outcome studies are reviewed in relation to the ongoing discussion about a process- or outcome-oriented approach to chaplaincy. A central question emerges from this discussion: how can outcome research be designed that respects the integrity of the profession of chaplaincy? A literature search in MEDLINE/Pubmed produced twenty-two chaplaincy outcome studies that met the inclusion criteria. A review of these studies shows that thus far most have focused on secondary chaplaincy outcomes (e.g., satisfaction) using quantitative designs. To respect the integrity of chaplaincy, it is recommended that future studies should also focus on characteristic chaplaincy outcomes, use mixed methods designs, and articulate more clearly how their chosen outcomes, outcome measures, and interventions relate to the work of chaplaincy.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 72 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.