In two chapters, the authors present more encompassing theoretical models that they suggest may explain the generally favorable associations observed between religion and health: The authors note that their model for effects on physical health does not consider 'supernatural'... explanations... since such mechanisms (if they exist at all) act outside the laws of science as we know them today.

Topics are arranged in the order of the other chapters, and provide technical information such as the type of population, the number of subjects, the existence of a control or a comparison group, and a 1-to-10 rating or "grade" of the study's quality and rigor.

The "reader thus gains a snapshot view of each study, can easily identify those with a variable of interest, and can reference back to the text to see what the authors have to say about it" (p. 139[9]).

[15] The Journal of the American Medical Association wrote that the authors of the Handbook of Religion and Health are well-regarded researchers in this maturing field... Their analysis of more than 1200 studies and 400 reviews is meticulous and balanced....

465-6[4]) JAMA also stated that "Studies are cited to illustrate the complexity and limitations of available knowledge," that "The authors offer theoretical models for how religion might directly or indirectly influence both mental and physical health," and that "The authors provide an outline for a religious history that can serve as part of a clinical assessment.

699–700;[5]) In The New Yorker, Jerome Groopman wrote that the Handbook's conclusions are not entirely encouraging: they suggest that although the relationship between health and spirituality is clearly worthy of serious study, much of the research done in the field to date has been shoddy.

Koenig and his collaborators also go to great lengths to educate the reader about negative effects of belief and orthodoxies... such as the fear that disease is punishment for sin, and that assistance is preferably derived through miracles rather than through medicine.

790-1[7]) In the American Journal of Psychiatry, Paul Genova wrote that "This Handbook is really a reference volume.... Case presentations are rare.

The information contained in this volume provides the background necessary to carry on an education program that is both theologically and intellectually (scientifically) sound....

The authors do not explicitly argue for the religion–health relation; they are content to let the weight of evidence as they present it speak for itself.... For a more critical discussion, the reader must look to other sources.

95-6[8]) First Things wrote that "The authors write in the desiccated tone of the social scientist who divorces his thought from the human encounter with the transcendent....

The Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing wrote that the authors "take on a Herculean task," and "every time I randomly opened to a page, I found something unanticipated and intriguing" (pp. 138, 139[9]).

(p. 365[10]) This article describes the first edition of the Handbook of Religion and Health, published in 2001, and written by Koenig, McCullough, and Larson.