The European Portuguese Posthumous Dignity Therapy Schedule of Questions: Initial development and validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Dignity therapy (DT) is a brief psychotherapeutic intervention with beneficial effects in the end-of-life experience. Since it provides a continuing bond between the bereaved and their loved ones, we speculated that it could be offered as a novel bereavement intervention following the patient's death. We aimed to develop, translate, and validate the Posthumous DT Schedule of Questions ( p -DT-SQ), for administration with bereaved relatives or friends. Method The original DT-SQ was adapted for application with bereaved relatives or friends. It was translated and back-translated to European Portuguese and revised by an expert committee. Content validity was assessed by the Content Validity Coefficient (CVC). The instrument was tested in a sample of 50 individuals from a large Senior Residence in Lisbon (10 elderly people and 40 healthcare professionals), who assessed face validity. Results The p -DT-SQ showed very good CVC (0.94) and face validity: it was considered clear, easy to understand, reasonable in length, and not difficult to answer. Participants felt comfortable answering the p -DT-SQ and felt it could positively affect the way themselves or others would remember their loved ones, allowing an understanding of the deceased's concerns, interests, and values. Significance of results We created and validated an adapted version of the DT-SQ to be used posthumously by bereaved family and friends. The European Portuguese version of the p -DT-SQ is clear, comprehensible, and aligned with the fundamentals of DT. While our data suggest its beneficial effects for those who are bereft, future research is needed to examine the impact of p -DT-SQ for those who are grieving.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".