Cited by 241Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

The efficacy of bereavement interventions: Determining who benefits.

Schut, Henk, Stroebe, Margaret S., van den Bout, Jan, Terheggen, Maaike·2001·Handbook of bereavement research: Consequences, coping, and care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/10436-029

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Bereavement interventions appear to be effective if aimed at high-risk groups or at those whose grieving process has already complicated.

    “Although bereavement interventions appear to be effective if aimed high-risk groups or at those whose grieving process has already complicated,57-59”

    From Complicated grief after perinatal loss (2012) · cites this paper as [58]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schut, H., Stroebe, M. S., van den Bout, J., & Terheggen, M.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Venue
Handbook of bereavement research: Consequences, coping, and care.
Published
2001
Pages
705-737
OpenAlex
W2496356454
Cited by
241
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 11
FWCI
25.32
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Psychological Association eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
bereavement, grief intervention, intervention efficacy, grief counseling

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