ArticleOmega2025
A Systematic Review of International Bereavement Models of Care and Implementation Barriers and Facilitators.
Article in Omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of the dual process model in end-of-life and bereavement interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- "Acknowledge my grief" - experiences and needs of bereavement support in Sweden following the death of a loved one.BMC public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bereavement care can facilitate adjustment to death and reduce immediate distress and long-term morbidity, mortality and health service utilisation. This systematic review aimed to identify international models of bereavement care, and barriers and facilitators to implementing such models. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO identified 64 studies for inclusion. The most common forms of bereavement support were bereavement packs, memory-making activities, condolence cards, memorial services, and follow-up contact. Only 14 models included a formal assessment of complex grief, and 17 studies considered culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Barriers included lack of institutional/financial support, staff discomfort delivering care, lack of dedicated staffing, and difficulty collecting/maintaining information. Facilitators were adequate funding/infrastructure, formal protocols/procedures, dedicated staffing, and staff training and support. Future research should address bereavement models of care in settings beyond palliative care, considering culturally and linguistically diverse populations, and should provide implementation data and strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.