Navigating Grief in Wartime: Needs Assessment and Help-Seeking Behaviors among Bereaved in Ukraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Traumatic losses are prevalent during armed conflicts and known to be a risk factor for prolonged grief disorder (Shevlin et al., 2024). Social support and psychoeducation are protective factors for prolonged grief disorder (Al-Gamal et al., 2018). Ukrainians are known to avoid seeking help or support after exposure to traumatic events (Quirke et al., 2021). Not much is known about help-seeking and supporting behavior following the loss of a loved one amidst the ongoing war in Ukraine. Objectives The aim of this exploratory study was to assess the experiences, needs, and help-seeking behavior of those in bereavement and those supporting them during the war in Ukraine. Methods An online questionnaire was designed by co-authors; data was collected in November 2023 via phone calls among users of the Opinion Internet panel by Factum Group Ukraine. Inclusion criteria were: a) Ukrainians aged 18-55; b) Internet users residing in Ukrainian cities with more than 50,000 residents before the full-scale invasion; c) those who currently live in Ukraine or abroad. The survey evaluated respondents’ experiences of enduring the loss of a loved one and supporting persons in grief after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, as well as the need for support and information about the grieving process. Results Fifty-three percent of survey respondents (n=400) were female. A quarter of the respondents lost a loved one since February 24, 2022 (15% due to death, 14% due to violent death, 5% missing in action), while 9% refused to respond. Among those in bereavement, the majority (63%) reported that it was vital for them to better understand their own grief process. One-third reported the need for additional support in coping with the loss. One-fifth (21%) of those experiencing loss sought support as the experience became unbearable. Among those seeking professional care, there was a difference in the frequency of approaching different specialists. Twenty percent of the respondents reported that they did not seek help but were willing to. The majority of respondents (62%) reported supporting a person who experienced loss. However, only 49% of them felt confident enough to do so. The majority (82%) of respondents said that they considered it important to have information on ways to support loved ones in grief. Conclusions Despite the fact that a third of people required support and care while experiencing a loss, only 1 in 5 approached mental health professionals or other healthcare specialists. Half of those who wanted to support their loved ones did not feel confident enough. Raising awareness among the population about the process of coping with loss, normalizing seeking support, and providing possible options for supporting people in grief is of high importance for the people of Ukraine affected by the full-scale war. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".