CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 106Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

A longitudinal study of bereavement phenomena in recently widowed elderly men

Byrne, G. J. A., Raphael, B.·1994·Psychological Medicine
DOI 10.1017/s0033291700027380
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A three-phase longitudinal design was used to study bereavement phenomena in a cohort (N = 78) of recently widowed elderly Australian men. One group of 57 widowers was compared with a second group of 21 widowers on a waiting list. A brief, interviewer-administered, structured questionnaire was used to rate the frequency of 22 self-reported bereavement phenomena. The prevalence and temporal evolution of these phenomena are described. Half of a subgroup of elderly widowers reporting high levels of bereavement phenomena at 6 weeks post-bereavement went on to exhibit persistent or chronic grief at 13 months post-bereavement. The prevalence of persistent or chronic grief throughout the first 13 months post-bereavement was 8.8%. Income, education and expectedness of the death were all negatively correlated with frequency of self-reported bereavement phenomena at 6 weeks post-bereavement. In a multiple regression analysis only expectedness of the death contributed significantly to prediction of the frequency of bereavement phenomena at 6 weeks post-bereavement. Widowers who were unable to anticipate their wife's death, even when their wife had suffered a long final illness, had a more severe bereavement reaction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291700027380

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although the assessment instruments all exhibited acceptable psychometric properties, possible differences between the scales in how the construct is measured could pose a challenge for comparison.

    “Although these assessment instruments all exhibited acceptable psychometric properties (Burnett et al., 1997; Byrne and Raphael, 1994; Prigerson et al., 2009, 1995b; Prigerson and Jacobs, 2001; Shear et al., 2006), possible differences between the scales in how the construct is measured could pose a challenge for comparison.”

    From Prevalence of prolonged grief disorder in adult bereavement: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Byrne and Raphael, 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Byrne, G. J. A., & Raphael, B.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Byrne, G. J. A.
ORCID
Byrne, G. J. A.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1994-05
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
411-421
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
DOI
10.1017/s0033291700027380
OpenAlex
W2137165108
Cited by
106
References
35
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 5548 d)
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
bereavement, widowhood, older men, chronic grief, income
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bereavement, Follow-Up Studies, Gender Identity, Grief, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Marriage, Personality Assessment, Caregivers, Widowhood

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review