Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Comparison of two diagnostic systems for Complicated Grief


Forstmeier, Simon; Maercker, Andreas (2007). Comparison of two diagnostic systems for Complicated Grief. Journal of Affective Disorders, 99(1-3):203-211.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To date, there are mainly two diagnostic systems that have been proposed for the diagnosis of Complicated Grief [Horowitz, M.J., Siegel, B., Holen, A., Bonanno, G.A., Milbrath, C., Stinson, C.H., 1997. Diagnostic criteria for complicated grief disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry 154, 904-910; Prigerson, H.G., Shear, M.K., Jacobs, S.C., Reynolds, C.F., Maciejewski, P.K., Davidson, J.R., Rosenheck, R., Pilkonis, P.A., Wortman, C.B., Williams, J.B., Widiger, T.A., Frank, E., Kupfer, D.J., Zisook, S., 1999. Consensus criteria for traumatic grief: a preliminary empirical test. British Journal of Psychiatry 174, 67-73]. There is also no data about prevalence rates of Complicated Grief in a representative sample. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic systems with regard to prevalence, conditional probabilities, and agreement.

METHODS: In a sample of elderly persons, features of bereavement, diagnoses of Complicated Grief and related symptoms were assessed. Agreement between the diagnostic systems was determined by kappa statistics.

RESULTS: 18.9% of the sample had experienced a major bereavement, in average 15 years before measurement. The prevalence rates were 4.2% (Horowitz et al.) and 0.9% (Prigerson et al.). The agreement was poor (kappa=.13), i.e. the minority of cases received both diagnoses. The conditional probabilities of developing CG after experiencing a major bereavement were 22.2% (Horowitz et al.) and 4.6% (Prigerson et al.).

LIMITATIONS: The findings are constrained to an elderly, urban population. Screening instruments, no clinical interviews, were used to assess psychopathology.

CONCLUSIONS: The Horowitz et al. criteria set is more inclusive and less strict than the Prigerson et al. criteria set. The importance of functional impairment and the number of symptoms needed account for this difference. Further research should integrate diagnostic systems in order to achieve international standardization of diagnostic criteria for Complicated Grief.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To date, there are mainly two diagnostic systems that have been proposed for the diagnosis of Complicated Grief [Horowitz, M.J., Siegel, B., Holen, A., Bonanno, G.A., Milbrath, C., Stinson, C.H., 1997. Diagnostic criteria for complicated grief disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry 154, 904-910; Prigerson, H.G., Shear, M.K., Jacobs, S.C., Reynolds, C.F., Maciejewski, P.K., Davidson, J.R., Rosenheck, R., Pilkonis, P.A., Wortman, C.B., Williams, J.B., Widiger, T.A., Frank, E., Kupfer, D.J., Zisook, S., 1999. Consensus criteria for traumatic grief: a preliminary empirical test. British Journal of Psychiatry 174, 67-73]. There is also no data about prevalence rates of Complicated Grief in a representative sample. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic systems with regard to prevalence, conditional probabilities, and agreement.

METHODS: In a sample of elderly persons, features of bereavement, diagnoses of Complicated Grief and related symptoms were assessed. Agreement between the diagnostic systems was determined by kappa statistics.

RESULTS: 18.9% of the sample had experienced a major bereavement, in average 15 years before measurement. The prevalence rates were 4.2% (Horowitz et al.) and 0.9% (Prigerson et al.). The agreement was poor (kappa=.13), i.e. the minority of cases received both diagnoses. The conditional probabilities of developing CG after experiencing a major bereavement were 22.2% (Horowitz et al.) and 4.6% (Prigerson et al.).

LIMITATIONS: The findings are constrained to an elderly, urban population. Screening instruments, no clinical interviews, were used to assess psychopathology.

CONCLUSIONS: The Horowitz et al. criteria set is more inclusive and less strict than the Prigerson et al. criteria set. The importance of functional impairment and the number of symptoms needed account for this difference. Further research should integrate diagnostic systems in order to achieve international standardization of diagnostic criteria for Complicated Grief.

Statistics

Citations

47 citations in Web of Science®
56 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Date:2007
Deposited On:13 Nov 2012 15:53
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 16:02
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0165-0327
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2006.09.013
PubMed ID:17055064

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

Article Networks

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations