MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917029672 · doi:10.1002/jclp.22751

Rumination moderates the role of meaning in the development of prolonged grief symptomatology

2019· article· en· W2917029672 on OpenAlexaff
Evgenia Milman, Robert A. Neimeyer, Marilyn Fitzpatrick, Christopher J. MacKinnon, Krista R. Muis, S. Robin Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuminationPsychologyNeuroticismGriefMeaning (existential)SpouseMediationDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyComplicated griefRisk factorSocial psychologyPersonalityPsychotherapistPsychiatryMedicineCognitionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To address the etiology of prolonged grief disorder (PGD) by examining whether rumination moderates the role of meaning-making in mediating the impact of PGD risk factors. METHOD: A survey assessing PGD risk factors (low social support, insecure attachment, violent loss, neuroticism, and loss of a spouse), meaning, and rumination was administered 2-12 months postloss among adults across North America and Europe (mean age = 44.3, 71.9% female). At a 7-10 months follow-up, symptoms of PGD were assessed (n = 171). RESULTS: When measuring meaning with the Grief and Meaning Reconstruction Inventory, the moderated mediation pathway was significant for each PGD-risk factor. However, when measuring meaning with the Integration of Stressful Life Experiences-Short Form, the pathway was significant for every risk factors except violent loss. CONCLUSIONS: Rumination appears to moderate meaning-making in the development of PGD symptomatology. These findings highlight rumination as a target for intervention with at-risk grievers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.381 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PsychologySame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207