2022
DOI: 10.1080/07481187.2022.2081998
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and initial test of the self-report grief and bereavement assessment

Abstract: Implementing evidence-based and cost-effective bereavement care is a challenge. A selfreport measure could assist to identify caregivers at-risk of prolonged grief. We developed a new measure via five steps: identification of risk and protective factors for prolonged grief, item generation, consultation with an expert panel (n = 8), review by the academic team and expert panel, and a pilot test with family caregivers (n = 19) from three palliative care services. The Grief and Bereavement Assessment is a brief … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 30 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Assessing families' risk for adverse mental health outcomes was the least frequently practiced evidence-based activity during both illness trajectories (Kobel et al, 2019;Naef, Peng-Keller, et al, 2020), which may be due to the lack of consensus on how to best screen for risk and prolonged grief (Hudson et al, 2018;Sealey et al, 2015) or perceptions about the scope of practice (Naef, Peng-Keller, et al, 2020). Recent efforts have focused on the development of self-reports (Sealey et al, 2023) and brief, practical tools for bereavement risk assessment (Blackburn & Dwyer, 2017;Grant et al, 2020;Morris, Anderson, et al, 2020). However, the need to develop and test valid, acceptable tools that apply to clinical practice remains (Hilberdink et al, 2023;Roberts et al, 2020).…”
Section: Adoption Of and Barriers To Evidence-based Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Assessing families' risk for adverse mental health outcomes was the least frequently practiced evidence-based activity during both illness trajectories (Kobel et al, 2019;Naef, Peng-Keller, et al, 2020), which may be due to the lack of consensus on how to best screen for risk and prolonged grief (Hudson et al, 2018;Sealey et al, 2015) or perceptions about the scope of practice (Naef, Peng-Keller, et al, 2020). Recent efforts have focused on the development of self-reports (Sealey et al, 2023) and brief, practical tools for bereavement risk assessment (Blackburn & Dwyer, 2017;Grant et al, 2020;Morris, Anderson, et al, 2020). However, the need to develop and test valid, acceptable tools that apply to clinical practice remains (Hilberdink et al, 2023;Roberts et al, 2020).…”
Section: Adoption Of and Barriers To Evidence-based Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%