Mental health is shaped by multiple psychological, social, cultural, and spiritual factors. This narrative review aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the relationship between spirituality, religiosity, and mental health across the lifespan, with particular emphasis on psychological well-being, coping, resilience, and help-seeking behaviors, while considering both beneficial and potentially adverse associations. A narrative review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies published between 2000 and 2026 were screened according to predefined eligibility criteria. A total of 52 publications, including quantitative and qualitative studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and narrative reviews, were included. The evidence was synthesized according to three life stages (childhood and adolescence, adulthood, and older adulthood), with an additional section examining help-seeking behaviors and access to mental health care across the lifespan. The reviewed evidence identified both beneficial and adverse mental health outcomes in relation to spirituality and religiosity. Beneficial outcomes included lower levels of depression, anxiety, substance use, and suicidal behaviors, as well as higher levels of resilience, emotional support, and life satisfaction. In contrast, negative religious coping and spiritual struggles were associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety, as well as delayed help-seeking behavior. Overall, the findings varied across study designs, populations, and cultural contexts. Spirituality and religiosity can influence mental health in both positive and negative ways throughout life. Understanding these relationships may help support more sensitive and individualized approaches to mental health care.

Introduction: Problematic internet use has been increasingly associated with depression, anxiety and other psychiatric symptoms; however, its impact on attentional functioning has not been thoroughly researched. This cross-sectional study was conducted in Târgu Mureș, Romania, and aimed to examine the associations between problematic internet use, attentional control, and symptoms of depression and anxiety in adults, and to determine whether problematic internet use independently predicts attentional control after accounting for emotional symptoms. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 224 adults who completed an anonymous online survey between 1 January 2026 and 1 April 2026. Problematic internet use was assessed using the Compulsive Internet Use Scale-14 (CIUS-14), attentional control using the Attentional Control Scale (ACS), depressive symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), anxiety symptoms using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), and eating disorder risk using the SCOFF questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, internal consistency analyses, Pearson correlations, group comparisons according to the CIUS-14 screening threshold, and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Results: Problematic internet use was significantly associated with lower attentional control (r = −0.493, p < 0.001), higher depressive symptoms (r = 0.408, p < 0.001), and higher anxiety symptoms (r = 0.467, p < 0.001). In the regression model, problematic internet use remained the only significant independent predictor of attentional control (B = −0.597, p < 0.001), whereas depressive and anxiety symptoms were not significant after adjustment. Participants above the CIUS-14 screening threshold reported significantly lower attentional control and higher depression and anxiety scores than those below the threshold. Conclusions: Problematic internet use was associated with poorer attentional control and greater emotional symptom severity in Romanian adults. These findings suggest that problematic internet use may be linked to a broader cognitive–emotional vulnerability profile. However, because of the cross-sectional design, self-report measures, convenience sampling, and lack of detailed information on specific online activities, the findings should be interpreted cautiously. Longitudinal studies using objective cognitive measures and more detailed assessment of digital behaviors are needed.