MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408037788 · doi:10.32872/cpe.11435

International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale Addendum for Refugees and Displaced people (IPGDS-ARD): A study of Arabic-speaking bereaved refugees

2025· article· en· W4408037788 on OpenAlexaff
Clare Killikelly, A. L. sgards Reymond, Anaïs Aeschlimann, Andreas Maercker, Eva Heim

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Psychology in Europe · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRefugeeGriefAddendumArabicDisplaced personScale (ratio)Traumatic griefPsychologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyLinguisticsGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Prolonged grief disorder (PGD) is a new and significant addition to the ICD-11 WHO disease classification system and the DSM 5-TR. As a new disorder, it stands to improve diagnostic precision, enhance communication among health professionals and patients, provide better access to care and lead to effective treatments and intervention. However, it remains to be determined if the new diagnostic criteria for PGD are applicable to different cultural groups. Method: Here we sought to adapt the International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale for refugees and displaced people. We conducted two focus groups with clinicians and health care workers and six cognitive interviews with bereaved Arabic-speaking refugees. Results: This formative research resulted in an addendum (comprised of three new scales) to the IPGDS aimed to aid with treatment planning: the 42 item Addendum for Refugees and Displaced people (IPGDS-ARD). Here we present the steps for scale augmentation based on cultural considerations, a detailed description of clinical utility, feasibility and content validity established at each step, and an analysis of the percent of change in content at each step. Conclusion: We conclude that the presented method of scale augmentation is a feasible and efficient approach that led to a culturally relevant, clinically useful addendum to an existing PGD questionnaire.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.414 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Psychology in EuropeSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207