Cargando…

Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form

BACKGROUND: Whereas the majority of bereaved persons recover from their grief without professional assistance, a minority develops pathological grief reactions. Etiological models postulate that dysfunctional cognitions may perpetuate such reactions. The Grief Cognitions Questionnaire (GCQ) assesses...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Doering, Bettina K., Boelen, Paul A., Eisma, Maarten C., Barke, Antonia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7848142/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33536985
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.620987
_version_ 1783645066967908352
author Doering, Bettina K.
Boelen, Paul A.
Eisma, Maarten C.
Barke, Antonia
author_facet Doering, Bettina K.
Boelen, Paul A.
Eisma, Maarten C.
Barke, Antonia
author_sort Doering, Bettina K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Whereas the majority of bereaved persons recover from their grief without professional assistance, a minority develops pathological grief reactions. Etiological models postulate that dysfunctional cognitions may perpetuate such reactions. The Grief Cognitions Questionnaire (GCQ) assesses thoughts after bereavement in nine interrelated domains. A short form (GCQ-SF) with four domains is often used. However, an evaluation of the psychometric properties of the GCQ-SF and its utility compared to the GCQ is lacking and these instruments have not been validated in German. METHOD: German bereaved persons (time since loss 35.3 ± 34.6 months) responded to an online survey containing the GCQ, measures of grief severity, grief rumination, symptoms of depression and anxiety, and optimism and pessimism. 585 participants (18–78 years, 88% women) were included. Item analyses and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. Correlations between the GCQ and GCQ-SF and grief rumination, optimism and pessimism assessed construct validity. Criterion-related validity was assessed by comparing whether the correlation of the GCQ (and the GCQ-SF) with grief severity was higher than with anxious and depressive symptoms. Logistic regression and receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) compared the questionnaires on their ability to predict probable prolonged grief ‘caseness’ (ICG ≥ 25, time since loss ≥6 months). RESULTS: Internal consistencies for both questionnaires were identical and excellent (α = 0.96). Confirmatory factor analyses obtained a satisfactory fit for models with nine and four correlated subscales and respective higher-order factor models. The GCQ and the GCQ-SF correlated higher with grief severity than with other measures of psychopathology. The logistic regression showed a significant association between the GCQ-SF and prolonged grief ‘caseness’. Of the remaining subscales of the GCQ, only one subscale (‘Others’) contributed to the prediction. The ROC analyses showed nearly identical areas under the curve. CONCLUSION: The translated GCQ and GCQ-SF demonstrated very good psychometric properties. The correlations with grief severity highlight the questionnaires’ clinical relevance. The questionnaires possessed identical diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. Whenever a timesaving assessment of the most typical grief-specific cognitions is important, the GCQ-SF represents an alternative to the GCQ. The original GCQ may still be superior when a more detailed description of a bereaved person’s cognitions is desirable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7848142
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78481422021-02-02 Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form Doering, Bettina K. Boelen, Paul A. Eisma, Maarten C. Barke, Antonia Front Psychol Psychology BACKGROUND: Whereas the majority of bereaved persons recover from their grief without professional assistance, a minority develops pathological grief reactions. Etiological models postulate that dysfunctional cognitions may perpetuate such reactions. The Grief Cognitions Questionnaire (GCQ) assesses thoughts after bereavement in nine interrelated domains. A short form (GCQ-SF) with four domains is often used. However, an evaluation of the psychometric properties of the GCQ-SF and its utility compared to the GCQ is lacking and these instruments have not been validated in German. METHOD: German bereaved persons (time since loss 35.3 ± 34.6 months) responded to an online survey containing the GCQ, measures of grief severity, grief rumination, symptoms of depression and anxiety, and optimism and pessimism. 585 participants (18–78 years, 88% women) were included. Item analyses and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. Correlations between the GCQ and GCQ-SF and grief rumination, optimism and pessimism assessed construct validity. Criterion-related validity was assessed by comparing whether the correlation of the GCQ (and the GCQ-SF) with grief severity was higher than with anxious and depressive symptoms. Logistic regression and receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) compared the questionnaires on their ability to predict probable prolonged grief ‘caseness’ (ICG ≥ 25, time since loss ≥6 months). RESULTS: Internal consistencies for both questionnaires were identical and excellent (α = 0.96). Confirmatory factor analyses obtained a satisfactory fit for models with nine and four correlated subscales and respective higher-order factor models. The GCQ and the GCQ-SF correlated higher with grief severity than with other measures of psychopathology. The logistic regression showed a significant association between the GCQ-SF and prolonged grief ‘caseness’. Of the remaining subscales of the GCQ, only one subscale (‘Others’) contributed to the prediction. The ROC analyses showed nearly identical areas under the curve. CONCLUSION: The translated GCQ and GCQ-SF demonstrated very good psychometric properties. The correlations with grief severity highlight the questionnaires’ clinical relevance. The questionnaires possessed identical diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. Whenever a timesaving assessment of the most typical grief-specific cognitions is important, the GCQ-SF represents an alternative to the GCQ. The original GCQ may still be superior when a more detailed description of a bereaved person’s cognitions is desirable. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7848142/ /pubmed/33536985 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.620987 Text en Copyright © 2021 Doering, Boelen, Eisma and Barke. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Doering, Bettina K.
Boelen, Paul A.
Eisma, Maarten C.
Barke, Antonia
Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title_full Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title_fullStr Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title_full_unstemmed Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title_short Validation of a German Version of the Grief Cognitions Questionnaire and Establishment of a Short Form
title_sort validation of a german version of the grief cognitions questionnaire and establishment of a short form
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7848142/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33536985
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.620987
work_keys_str_mv AT doeringbettinak validationofagermanversionofthegriefcognitionsquestionnaireandestablishmentofashortform
AT boelenpaula validationofagermanversionofthegriefcognitionsquestionnaireandestablishmentofashortform
AT eismamaartenc validationofagermanversionofthegriefcognitionsquestionnaireandestablishmentofashortform
AT barkeantonia validationofagermanversionofthegriefcognitionsquestionnaireandestablishmentofashortform