Cited by 92Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthCOVID-19 and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Support needs and barriers to accessing support: Baseline results of a mixed-methods national survey of people bereaved during the COVID-19 pandemic

Open access
Harrop, Emily, Goss, Silvia, Farnell, Damian, Longo, Mirella, Byrne, Anthony, Barawi, Kali, Torrens-Burton, Anna, Nelson, Annmarie +9 more·2021·Palliative Medicine

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a mass bereavement event which has profoundly disrupted grief experiences. Understanding support needs and access to support among people bereaved at this time is crucial to ensuring appropriate bereavement support infrastructure. Aim: To investigate grief experiences, support needs and use of formal and informal bereavement support among people bereaved during the pandemic. Design: Baseline results from a longitudinal survey. Support needs and experiences of accessing support are reported using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis of free-text data. Setting/participants: 711 adults bereaved in the UK between March and December 2020, recruited via media, social media, national associations and community/charitable organisations. Results: High-level needs for emotional support were identified. Most participants had not sought support from bereavement services (59%, n = 422) or their General-Practitioner (60%, n = 428). Of participants who had sought such support, over half experienced difficulties accessing bereavement services (56%, n = 149)/General-Practitioner support (52%, n = 135). About 51% reported high/severe vulnerability in grief; among these, 74% were not accessing bereavement or mental-health services. Barriers included limited availability, lack of appropriate support, discomfort asking for help and not knowing how to access services. About 39% ( n = 279) experienced difficulties getting support from family/friends, including relational challenges, little face-to-face contact and disrupted collective mourning. The perceived uniqueness of pandemic bereavement and wider societal strains exacerbated their isolation. Conclusions: People bereaved during the pandemic have high levels of support needs alongside difficulties accessing support. We recommend increased provision and tailoring of bereavement services, improved information on support options and social/educational initiatives to bolster informal support and ameliorate isolation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/02692163211043372

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harrop, E., Goss, S., Farnell, D., Longo, M., Byrne, A., Barawi, K., Torrens-Burton, A., Nelson, A., Seddon, K., Machin, L., Sutton, E., Roulston, A., Finucane, A., Penny, A., Smith, K. V., Sivell, S., & Selman, L. E.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • PRIME Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
  • Keele University (GB)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Childhood Bereavement Network (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Harrop, Emily
Venue
Palliative Medicine
Published
2021-10-22
Volume
35
Issue
10
Pages
1985-1997
ISSN
  • 0269-2163 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-030X
OpenAlex
W3172502655
Cited by
92
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 2
FWCI
8.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • uk research and innovation (ES/V012053/1)
  • marie curie (MCCC-FCO-11-C)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
bereavement, COVID-19 pandemic, grief, support needs, barriers to support, informal support, general practitioner support, bereavement services, social isolation, mental health services, family and friend support
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adult, Bereavement, Grief, Humans, Social Support, Pandemics

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