Measuring Grief in the Context of Traumatic Loss: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following traumatic loss, defined as the death of a loved one due to unexpected or violent circumstances, adults may experience a myriad of grief-related problems. Given the addition of Prolonged Grief Disorders into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders Fifth Edition, Text-Revision and influx of unexpected deaths due to the global Coronavirus pandemic, there is heightened interest in the measurement of grief-related processes. We conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify measures of grief used in studies of adults who experienced traumatic loss. Searches yielded 164 studies that used 31 unique measures of grief-related constructs. The most commonly used instrument was the Inventory of Complicated Grief-Revised. Half of the measures assessed constructs beyond diagnosable pathological grief responses. Given the wide variation and adaptations of measures reviewed, we recommend greater testing and uniformity of measurement across the field. Future research is needed to adapt and/or design measures to evaluate new criteria for Prolonged Grief Disorder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".