Measurement and assessment of grief in a large international sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2022, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and an update of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5 TR) were released for implementation worldwide and now include the new Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD). The newest definition of PGD is based on robust clinical research from the Global North yet until now has not been tested for global applicability. METHODS: The current study assesses the new PGD ICD-11 criteria in a large international sample of 1393 bereaved adults. The majority of the sample was included from the USΑ. Additionally, we conduct a sub-sample analysis to evaluate the psychometric properties, probable caseness of PGD, and differences in network structure across three regions of residency (USA, Greece-Cyprus, Turkey-Iran). RESULTS: The psychometric validity and reliability of the 33-item International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale (IPGDS) were confirmed across the whole sample and for each regional group. Using the strict diagnostic algorithm, the probable caseness for PGD for the whole sample was 3.6 %. Probable caseness was highest for the Greece-Cyprus group (6.9 %) followed by Turkey-Iran (3.2 %) and the USA (2.8 %). Finally, the network structure of the IPGDS standard items and cultural supplement items (total of 33 items) confirmed the strong connection between central items of PGD, and revealed unique network connections within the regional groups. LIMITATIONS: Future research is encouraged to include larger sample sizes and a more systematic assessment of culture. CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings confirm the global applicability of the new ICD-11 PGD disorder definition as evaluated through the newly developed IPGDS. This scale includes culturally sensitive grief symptoms that may improve clinical precision and decision-making.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".