This study presents an integrated review of religious coping, comparing theocentric and non-theocentric mechanisms, and examining research trends. Combining a narrative review with a VOSviewer-based bibliometric analysis of 2403 Scopus-indexed articles (1982–2025), the study examines the conceptual differences and functional roles of coping strategies in various religious traditions. The study’s results highlight three main differences between theocentric and non-theocentric traditions. These encompass theological and existential meaning-making, surrendering to God and self-control, as well as spiritual renewal and personal transformation. Theocentric coping is typically based on a divine relationship and prayer, whereas non-theocentric approaches emphasize inner balance, rituals, and ethical self-improvement. It has been found that most research focuses on Western, monotheistic contexts, primarily Christianity and Islam, while non-theocentric systems such as Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism remain underrepresented. The peripheral use of terms such as mindfulness, meditation, and holistic care suggests that although these topics exist, they are still insufficiently studied in the field of research on religious coping. This study contributes to the theoretical enrichment of the thematic field of religious coping and promotes the development of empirical research aimed at in-depth examination of non-theocentric coping practices in crises, as well as the revision of conventional models for coping assessment, which do not sufficiently reflect the existing spiritual and philosophical diversity of non-theocentric traditions.

Background: Cyberchondria, a combination of the words “cyber” and “hypochondriasis”, is a condition that is receiving increasing attention by clinicians and researchers globally. Researchers are currently using multiple scales to quantify it. Furthermore, the scales have been translated into multiple languages. Objective: This study aims to examine the extent to which researchers are measuring cyberchondria using the 33-item Cyberchondria Severity Scale (CSS) and its 12-item abbreviated version, the CSS-12. It also examines the relative utilization of cyberchondria scales in different languages. Methods: PubMed Central® was searched for articles published between May 1, 2019, and December 31, 2024, using the term “cyberchondria.” Included articles mentioned the CSS, were empirical studies, and were in English. Each was categorized by CSS version, publication year, and language of scale implementation. Chi-Square tests assessed associations, and Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient evaluated trend monotonicity. Results: Of 65 articles identified, 21 used the CSS, 20 used the CSS-12, and the remainder employed unknown or modified versions. CSS-12 usage following its introduction in 2019, but no significant association existed between publication year and instrument choice (p=0.48). The relationship between year and the percentage of articles using the CSS-12 was not significantly monotonic (rho=0.75; p=0.084). The CSS was most implemented in Turkish, while the CSS-12 was most implemented in English. Conclusions: The CSS-12 has gained traction in cyberchondria research, though the original CSS remains widely used. The comparability of CSS scales across languages requires further research. Clinical Trial: n/a