Scholarlink

Background <p>The eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) introduces Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) as a new diagnostic category. This paper summarizes methodological approaches and prevalence estimates of studies on PGD in ICD-11.</p> Methods <p>This review follows the JBI Manual of Evidence Synthesis and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO (2011–2024), along with grey literature sources (Web of Science, Science.gov, NDLTD Global ETD Search). Included studies were cross-sectional or longitudinal, evaluating PGD prevalence using ICD-11 criteria. Two reviewers (KN, SK) independently screened studies, with a third (SG) resolving disagreements. Methodological quality was not assessed. Data extraction covered bibliographic details, study period, location, sample characteristics, diagnostic tools, algorithms, and prevalence.</p> Results <p>Of 124 screened records, 35 studies were included in a qualitative synthesis. Seven main study categories emerged, primarily bereaved adults and representative national samples. Of 46 study samples, 24 were from Europe, followed by North America (<i>n</i> = 10) and Asia (<i>n</i> = 5), with none from South America. The PG-13 was the most commonly used tool, often omitting and raising ICD-11 PGD criteria simultaneously. ICD-11 PGD prevalence ranged from 1.5 to 15.3% in bereaved adults and 9.9–11.4% in national samples.</p> Conclusions <p>Findings reveal heterogeneous study populations but limited geographic diversity. Standardized PGD assessments aligned with ICD-11 criteria, using tools specifically designed for ICD-11, along with detailed sample reporting, are needed to improve study comparability and consistency of prevalence. Important gaps by geographical and demographic groups remain.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The prevalence of prolonged grief disorder according to the international classification of diseases 11: a scoping review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月25日

查看全文
  • Kiana Nafarieh,
  • Sophia Krüger,
  • Karl Deutscher,
  • Stefanie Schreiter,
  • Adrian P. Mundt,
  • Andreas Jung,
  • Seena Fazel,
  • Andreas Heinz,
  • Stefan Gutwinski

摘要

Background

The eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) introduces Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) as a new diagnostic category. This paper summarizes methodological approaches and prevalence estimates of studies on PGD in ICD-11.

Methods

This review follows the JBI Manual of Evidence Synthesis and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO (2011–2024), along with grey literature sources (Web of Science, Science.gov, NDLTD Global ETD Search). Included studies were cross-sectional or longitudinal, evaluating PGD prevalence using ICD-11 criteria. Two reviewers (KN, SK) independently screened studies, with a third (SG) resolving disagreements. Methodological quality was not assessed. Data extraction covered bibliographic details, study period, location, sample characteristics, diagnostic tools, algorithms, and prevalence.

Results

Of 124 screened records, 35 studies were included in a qualitative synthesis. Seven main study categories emerged, primarily bereaved adults and representative national samples. Of 46 study samples, 24 were from Europe, followed by North America (n = 10) and Asia (n = 5), with none from South America. The PG-13 was the most commonly used tool, often omitting and raising ICD-11 PGD criteria simultaneously. ICD-11 PGD prevalence ranged from 1.5 to 15.3% in bereaved adults and 9.9–11.4% in national samples.

Conclusions

Findings reveal heterogeneous study populations but limited geographic diversity. Standardized PGD assessments aligned with ICD-11 criteria, using tools specifically designed for ICD-11, along with detailed sample reporting, are needed to improve study comparability and consistency of prevalence. Important gaps by geographical and demographic groups remain.