ArticlePloS one2025
What does it mean to have experienced the death of a relative in a context of social and funeral restrictions? Lessons from the pandemic for bereavement research and clinical practice.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Can the 'Deathbed Etiquette' guide support friends and family to navigate the dying process? A qualitative study examining the views of bereaved people.Palliative care and social practice · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic raised concerns about their impact on people who were bereaved in this period. Numerous studies have attempted to quantify this impact. However, they have often adopted a pathologizing perspective on grief, with little attention being paid to the mediating processes and to the diversity of experiences, and their results have appeared contradictory. This study takes a comprehensive approach to understand these experiences in their uniqueness, without pathologizing them. Interviews with 12 bereaved people were analyzed using an interpretative phenomenological analysis and drawing on the theoretical framework of meaning-making, to explore the meanings that they gave to their loss and grief in a context of social and funeral restrictions. In our findings, the context of the pandemic appeared to be completely incompatible with the field of dying and mourning, creating paradoxical injunctions for some participants. While this led to feelings of guilt, powerlessness and loss of meaning for some, others were able to experience meaningful moments and to find solace in the farewell. All experiences were far from what had been expected, for better or for worse, and participants had to find their own ways to make sense of these unexpected experiences. The meanings they gave were complex, combining different levels of meaning - personal, moral, societal, or existential - and evolved over time, as did their emotional experiences. The results highlight the notions of paradoxical injunctions and grieving for an ideal goodbye as relevant for understanding and supporting the bereaved, drawing avenues for therapeutic work (e.g., restoring agency by providing a secure space to create a meaningful rite). They also have implications for research, highlighting the need to broaden the understanding of "impact", to include mediators assessing subjectivity, and to privilege person-centered qualitative and quantitative methods.
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.