Coping with suicide bereavement: A focus-group study of adaptation processes over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explored the coping resources mobilized by individuals bereaved by suicide and examined how these processes evolve over time. Twenty-one participants, bereaved for at least 14 months, took part in five semi-structured focus groups. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, allowing the identification of key themes and temporal dynamics. Two major phases emerged from participants' narratives. Initially, participants relied on survival strategies and sought meaning through routines, social support, and information-seeking. Over time, participants reported engaging in deeper restructuring processes: reorganizing their daily lives, redefining their identity, and reshaping the bonds with the deceased. Emotionally salient moments-such as anniversaries-were described as both challenging and potentially meaningful. The findings highlight the complexity and non-linearity of suicide grief, with multidimensional processes unfolding over time. These findings offer valuable insights into the lived experiences of people bereaved by suicide and suggest the need for flexible, tailored clinical support.
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 | 0.000 | 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".