Measurement and assessment of grief in a large international sample.

BACKGROUND: In 2022, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and an update of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5 TR) were released for implementation worldwide and now include the new Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD). The newest definition of PGD is based on robust clinical research from the Global North yet until now has not been tested for global applicability. METHODS: The current study assesses the new PGD ICD-11 criteria in a large international sample of 1393 bereaved adults. The majority of the sample was included from the USΑ. Additionally, we conduct a sub-sample analysis to evaluate the psychometric properties, probable caseness of PGD, and differences in network structure across three regions of residency (USA, Greece-Cyprus, Turkey-Iran). RESULTS: The psychometric validity and reliability of the 33-item International Prolonged Grief Disorder Scale (IPGDS) were confirmed across the whole sample and for each regional group. Using the strict diagnostic algorithm, the probable caseness for PGD for the whole sample was 3.6 %. Probable caseness was highest for the Greece-Cyprus group (6.9 %) followed by Turkey-Iran (3.2 %) and the USA (2.8 %). Finally, the network structure of the IPGDS standard items and cultural supplement items (total of 33 items) confirmed the strong connection between central items of PGD, and revealed unique network connections within the regional groups. LIMITATIONS: Future research is encouraged to include larger sample sizes and a more systematic assessment of culture. CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings confirm the global applicability of the new ICD-11 PGD disorder definition as evaluated through the newly developed IPGDS. This scale includes culturally sensitive grief symptoms that may improve clinical precision and decision-making.

Associations Between Primary Residence and Mental Health in Global Marginalized Populations.

Scholars suggest that marginalized people in non-urban areas experience higher distress levels and fewer psychosocial resources than in urban areas. Researchers have yet to test whether precise proximity to urban centers is associated with mental health for marginalized populations. We recruited 1733 people who reported living in 45 different countries. Participants entered their home locations and completed measures of anxiety, depression, social support, and resilience. Regression and thematic analyses were used to determine what role distance from legislative and urban centers may play in mental health when marginalized people were disaggregated. Greater distance from legislative center predicted higher anxiety and resilience. Greater distance from urban center also predicted more resilience. Thematic analyses yielded five categories (e.g., safety, connection) that further illustrated the impact of geographic location on health. Implications for community mental health are discussed including the need to better understand and further expand resilience in rural areas.