Template:Did you know nominations/Bereavement group
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 20:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bereavement group
- ... that bereavement support groups are one of the most common services offered for grief but have little evidence of improving psychological outcomes? Source: "Some 38 papers were found, and all were retained to identify the outcomes researched and research findings. Many different outcomes were studied in the 18 quantitative, 11 qualitative, and 9 mixed-methods investigations undertaken worldwide... Most commonly, a group of bereavement services was evaluated as a whole, followed by group therapy, individual counseling, written information, and other less common services." https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/palliative-and-supportive-care/article/scoping-review-of-bereavement-service-outcomes/E059C4522F70521635A17F33FDC44426"This review summarizes the evidence of bereavement groups for symptoms of grief and depression. The literature search using Web of Science, EBSCO, PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE yielded 14 studies (N = 1519) meeting the inclusion criteria (i.e., randomized-controlled trials, bereaved adults, bereavement group, validated measures). Overall, bereavement groups were marginally more effective than control groups post-treatment (gG = 0.33, gD = 0.22) but not at follow-up. Although tertiary interventions yielded larger effect sizes than secondary interventions, the difference was not significant. The results imply that the evidence for bereavement groups is weak, although the large heterogeneity of concepts for intervention and control groups limits the generalizability." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07481187.2020.1772410
- Reviewed:
Created by OftenRainbow (talk). Self-nominated at 20:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bereavement group; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
New enough in mainspace and long enough. Nominator is QPQ-exempt. The two metastudies agree as to the scant evidence for psychological improvement. No textual issues I see and lots of good RSMED-compliant sourcing. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:29, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
