Cited by 27Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic Care

Portuguese validation of the Prolonged Grief Disorder Questionnaire–Predeath (PG–12): Psychometric properties and correlates

Coelho, Alexandra, Silva, Cláudia, Barbosa, António·2017·Palliative and Supportive Care

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to contribute to the validation of the Portuguese version of the Prolonged Grief Disorder Questionnaire–Predeath (PG–12), examining its psychometric properties, including factorial, discriminant, and predictive validity. The prevalence of predeath prolonged grief disorder (PGD) and its psychosocial correlates were also analyzed. Method: The PG–12 was assessed in a sample of family caregivers (FCs) of oncological patients in palliative care. The factorial and discriminant validity of the PG–12 were evaluated by confirmatory factor analysis. The prevalence of predeath PGD was calculated and correlated with sociodemographic characteristics, perception of illness, intensity of care, coping, and caregiver burden. Prospective data were used to assess predictive validity. Results: The sample was composed of 94 FCs, mostly female (78.8%) and daughters (61.3%), with a mean age of 52.02 (SD = 12.87). The PG–12 has been shown to be reliable, to have high internal consistency, to be monofactorial in structure, and to be independent from depression, anxiety, and burden, although predeath grief influences these symptoms. In our sample, 33% met the criteria for predeath PGD. The circumstances and coping mechanisms are also correlated with predeath grief. The PG–12 has also been shown to be predictive of postdeath outcome. Significance of results: The PG–12 can be a useful screening tool for early identification of risk for maladjustment to loss among family caregivers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1478951516001000

Cites

47 of 47 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coelho, A., Silva, C., & Barbosa, A.
Affiliations
  • Hospital de Santa Maria (PT)
  • Escola Superior de Saúde do Alcoitão (PT)
  • University of Lisbon (PT)
Corresponding author
Coelho, Alexandra
Venue
Palliative and Supportive Care
Published
2017-01-04
Volume
15
Issue
5
Pages
544-553
ISSN
  • 1478-9515 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-9523
OpenAlex
W2561243053
Cited by
27
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Palliative & Supportive Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
family caregivers, palliative care, cancer patients, caregiver burden, coping, psychometric properties, predictive validity
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Female, Grief, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Palliative Care, Portugal, Prospective Studies, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Translating, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence, Caregivers

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