Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40850923›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Instruments for measuring grief in bereaved adults: a protocol for a COSMIN-based systematic review.

Jijia Liu, Meijun Ou, Xianghua Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jijia LiuXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-8491-7294
Meijun OuHunan Cancer Hospital, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of the School of Medicine, Central South University Xiangya, Changsha, Hunan, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8132-8136
Xianghua XuHunan Cancer Hospital, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of the School of Medicine, Central South University Xiangya, Changsha, Hunan, China 16962508@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-6707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGrief associated with bereavement is a multidimensional psychological, physiological and behavioural response to the loss of loved ones. Bereaved individuals may experience physical distress, separation anxiety, intense yearning and cognitive confusion, with an increased risk of adverse physical and mental health outcomes, including death. Currently, various tools are used to measure grief in bereaved adults; however, these tools show significant differences in their cultural context and quality of development. Psychometric properties, including reliability, validity and responsiveness, etc., are essential for ensuring the scientific use of grief assessment tools and for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. Previous reviews have lacked a standardised methodological framework for psychometric evaluation of grief instruments. Therefore, this study aims to identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of grief assessment instruments in bereaved adults in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) methodology. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol 2015 checklist. A systematic search will be conducted across 7 English and 2 Chinese databases from their inception until 1 March 2025. Studies focusing on the psychometric properties of instruments for measuring grief in bereaved adults will be included. 2 reviewers will individually screen and extract the relevant literature. This systematic review will adhere to the COSMIN guidelines for instrument evaluations. A qualitative synthesis approach will be used to aggregate the psychometric properties of each instrument across studies. The COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist will be employed to assess the risk of bias, while the COSMIN quality criteria will be applied to evaluate the methodological quality of the findings. The principle of taking the lowest rating will be used when summarising the quality of each psychometric property. The overall quality of evidence will then be appraised using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, which will inform recommendations for the evidence-based use of the instruments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is a meta-analysis of data from existing studies that do not involve direct interaction with human participants or the collection of patient-specific information. Consequently, review by an ethics committee was not applicable. The findings of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared at relevant conventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024573767.

Indexed as

BereavementGriefPsychometricsAdultHumansReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAdult palliative careMENTAL HEALTHPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID40850923
PMCPMC12382541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.