Psychometric properties of the German version of the Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Questionnaire (DAAPGQ)

Julia Treml; Michaela Nagl; Elmar Braehler; Paul A. Boelen; Anette Kersting

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0254959

Abstract

The Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Questionnaire (DAAPGQ) was developed to measure depressive and anxious avoidance behaviors, which, according to cognitive-behavioral models, are supposed to play an important role in the development and maintenance of prolonged grief. The present study aimed to develop a German version of the DAAPGQ and evaluate its psychometric properties and validity within a representative sample of the German general population (N = 2531). The German-language DAAPGQ was developed using a forward-backward translation procedure. Then, a subsample of individuals who reported having lost a significant other (N = 1371) of a representative sample was assessed with the German DAAPGQ, along with information on sociodemographic characteristics, prolonged grief symptom severity (PG-13), general anxiety (GAD-2) and depression (PHQ-2). The factor structure of the DAAPGQ was evaluated using confirmatory factor analyses, reliability by calculating internal consistency on subscale level and convergent validity by correlations between DAAPQG subscale sores with PG-13, GAD-2 and PHQ-2 sum scores. As expected, a two-factor model with correlated latent variables showed good fit to the data, replicating findings from the original version. Internal consistency was high for both subscales (Cronbach’s α .86 and .95, respectively). Convergent validity was established by theoretically expected and statistically significant positive correlations of DAAPGQ subscales with symptom severity of prolonged grief, depression, and anxiety and negative correlations with time since loss. Furthermore, the addition of depressive and anxious avoidance significantly improved the prediction of prolonged grief symptom severity over sociodemographic and loss-related information. In sum, our results suggest that the German-language DAAPGQ is a reliable and valid measure of depressive and anxious avoidance and a useful tool to improve our knowledge on the role of avoidance in prolonged grief. We also provide descriptive data to improve the applicability of the DAAPGQ for individual diagnostics.

Citation: Treml J, Nagl M, Braehler E, Boelen PA, Kersting A (2021) Psychometric properties of the German version of the Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Questionnaire (DAAPGQ). PLoS ONE 16(8): e0254959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959

Editor: Manuel Fernández-Alcántara, Universitat d’Alacante, SPAIN

Received: May 10, 2021; Accepted: July 6, 2021; Published: August 10, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Treml et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Grief is a natural response to the death of a loved one, and most bereaved are able to cope with the loss over time. For an estimated 10% of the bereaved, however, the grief reaction becomes abnormally persistent and causes significant impairment in functioning [1]. Considering only people bereaved by unnatural losses such as homicide, suicide or accidents, revealed an even substantially higher rate of 49% [2]. This condition, called Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD), is part of the newest revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as a new diagnostic entity. The core symptoms are pervasive longing or yearning for the deceased or persistent preoccupation with the deceased coupled with functional impairment that extends beyond six months. Additionally, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has now approved to include PGD in the forthcoming DSM-5-TR [3]. As the criteria for PGD changed over time, we use the term PGD symptoms throughout the manuscript to refer to the various grief disorders proposed over the years such as pathological, complicated, traumatic or prolonged grief or persistent complex bereavement disorder [4–8].

A Cognitive-behavioral theory proposes that PGD symptoms develop and persist due to three processes: (1) difficulties revising internalized representations of the self and the lost person to integrate the reality of the loss into the autobiographical memory (2) persistent negative global beliefs and misinterpretations of grief reactions, and (3) anxious and depressive avoidance behavior [9]. Therefore, cognitive-behavioral treatments concentrate on confronting the implications of the loss, changing negative cognitions, and reducing avoidance behaviors. These interventions have been shown to be effective for patients with PGD symptoms [e.g., 10–12].

With regard to avoidance behavior, a distinction can be drawn between depressive and anxious avoidance. The first refers to the avoidance of activities that could foster adjustment, such as social, recreational, and occupational activities. The depressive avoidance is driven by the view that these activities are useless and unfulfilling without the deceased. The latter refers to avoidance of stimuli associated with the loss due to the fear that confrontation with these reminders will be unbearable [13].

Although avoidance behavior is considered a central component of the cognitive-behavioral theory of PGD symptoms, its role in the development and maintenance of PGD symptoms is not well understood. To advance the understanding of underlying mechanisms of PGD symptoms and investigate the role of avoidance after bereavement, Boelen and Van Den Bout [14] developed the Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Questionnaire (DAAPGQ). Nine items were generated, five tapping depressive avoidance (DA) and four tapping anxious avoidance (AA). All items were developed based on literature on coping with loss as well as interviews with bereaved suffering from “emotional complications after their loss” [14]. The initial validation of the questionnaire provided evidence that both forms of avoidance are distinct and that they contribute to the explained variance of symptom-levels of PGD, even after controlling for demographic and loss-related variables. Furthermore, the study showed that DA and AA were inversely related to time since loss. However, the correlations were low, suggesting that avoidance tendencies only marginally decline over time once they are present [14].

The inclusion of the DAAPGQ into observational studies has yielded some interesting insights into the role of depressive and anxious avoidance in PGD symptoms. Boelen and Eisma [13] found that both depressive and anxious avoidance are correlates of PGD symptoms and that anxious avoidance in the first year of bereavement is a prospective risk factor for PGD symptoms. Depressive avoidance was also found to be a significant mediator of the association between violent loss and PGD symptoms, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), whereas anxious avoidance was a mediator of the association between violent loss and PTSD [15].

A study investigating the role of negative cognitions and avoidance behavior in PGD symptoms, PTSD, anger, and revenge thoughts after homicide revealed that those who engage in depressive avoidance showed higher levels of PGD symptoms and PTSD, whereas anxious avoidance was associated with elevated revenge thoughts and feelings [16]. Additionally, a recent study revealed that depressive and anxious avoidance partially mediated the associations between PGD symptoms and worrying and rumination, suggesting that targeting both depressive and anxious avoidance could reduce rumination [17]. These results complement the findings of Eisma and colleagues, who found that avoidance behaviors mediated the link between grief rumination and PGD symptoms as well as depression [18].

Taken together, these results underline the assumption that avoidance behavior plays an important role in the development and persistence of PGD symptoms and other emotional distress after losing a loved one. However, all these studies were conducted in the Netherlands, and more international research is necessary. As a precondition for this goal, the present study aimed to develop a German version of the DAAPGQ, examine its psychometric properties and evaluate validity.

The original DAAPGQ was first applied in the context of an observational study in which the validation of the instrument was not the actual goal. The sample was therefore small. Nonetheless, the findings demonstrated factorial validity as well as convergent validity [14]. An empirically validated measure of grief-related avoidance is not only essential to support research. Such an instrument can also help clinicians identify patients at risk of developing PGD and assist therapists in individualized treatment planning and monitoring treatment progress.

The inclusion of PGD in the ICD-11 and the forthcoming DSM-5-TR further emphasizes the need to assess etiological factors that contribute to this disorder, such as grief-related avoidance. Moreover, since PGD must be explicitly considered with particular attention to cultural differences in the duration of symptoms and grief expression (Killikelly and Maercker, 2017), validated translations of questionnaires like the DAAPGQ are indispensable. We, therefore, aimed to provide a German translation of the DAAPGQ and extend the psychometric testing and validation. Concerning the factorial structure, we expected an acceptable model fit for a two-factor model comparable to the original version. Regarding convergent validity, we predicted the DAAPGQ would be positively associated with symptoms of PGD, depression, and anxiety and marginally decline under the influence of time and therefore show a small but negative correlation with time since loss. Associations between the DAAPGQ, PGD, depression and time since loss have already been investigated (as described above). The association between the DAAPGQ and anxiety, however, has not yet been examined. Given that PGD and anxiety symptoms have been shown to be low to moderately correlated [19–21], we would expect similar correlations between the DAAPGQ and anxiety. Anxiety and avoidance reinforce each other, which in turn can hinder the processing of grief-related information [22] and thus contribute to the development of PGD. We therefore expected at least low associations between depressive and anxious avoidance and anxiety. Additionally, we assumed that depressive and anxious avoidance would predict symptoms of PGD, even after controlling for sociodemographic and loss-related variables.

Materials and methods

Procedures

A representative sample of the German population was drawn to be included in a cross-sectional survey between November 2017 and February 2018 based on a three-stage random sampling procedure: 1) random selection of 258 regional sample point areas, 2) random selection of target households within sample point areas based on a random-route procedure, 3) random selection of target persons within target households based on a Kish selection grid. Inclusion criteria for target persons were age equal or above 14 years, sufficient fluency in German language, and written informed consent. Random sampling and fieldwork were conducted by an independent market and social research agency (USUMA, Berlin, Germany). Target persons were approached without an appointment by one of 223 trained interviewers, up to four attempts were made to reach a target person. Potential participants received oral and written information about the study and provided informed consent. For target persons under the age of 18, additional parental informed consent was obtained. Sociodemographic information was collected in a face-to-face interview. Afterwards, participants filled out self-report measures on their own, and interviewers assisted in case of questions. The study and the procedures were approved by the local ethical review board (Leipzig University, Medical Faculty; AZ: 418/17-ek, 23.10.2017).

Participants

Of a total number of 5093 randomly selected target persons, 2531 (49.7%) could be included in the study. Reasons for non-response were that a) households could not be reached (n = 731, 14.4%), b) households refused to participate (n = 840, 16.5%), c) target persons could not be reached (n = 181, 3.6%), d) target persons refused to participate (n = 804, 15.8%). Six interviews were not applicable for analyses. Bias due to non-response was limited by household- (household size) and person-level (age, gender, place of residence according to federal state) weights. Of the 2531 individuals included in the study, 1371 (54.2%) reported having experienced the loss of a significant person.

Measures

The constructs used for the present study and described below were part of a larger thematically diverse set of self-report questionnaires implemented in the cross-sectional survey.

Sociodemographic information.

Characteristics of the participant (age, gender, and education level) and characteristics of the deceased and the loss (e.g., relationship to the deceased, cause of death, time since death) were measured with a self-constructed questionnaire.

Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Disorder (DAAPGQ).

The DAAPGQ was developed to examine the role of depressive (DA) and anxious avoidance (AA) in PGD. The questionnaire contains nine items rated on an 8-point scale ranging from 1 = “not at all true for me” to 8 = “completely true for me.” Five items were constructed to measure DA (range 5–40) and four items to measure AA (range 4–32). The first investigation revealed internal consistencies of .90 for the DA subscale and .74 for the AA subscale and both subscales were correlated with r = .77. [14]. The German Version of the DAAPGQ is provided within the S1 File. Two psychologists (JT and MN) independently translated the English version of the DAAPGQ into German. Both versions were compared for differences and merged by consensus into one German version. This version was then back translated by a native speaker. The back-translated version was then discussed with the original author (PB) for equivalence.

Symptoms of prolonged grief disorder.

Symptoms of PGD were assessed using the German version of the PG-13 [6]. The PG-13 contains 13 items, 11 items assessing cognitive, behavioral, and emotional symptoms, rated on a 5-point Likert scale, and two items on duration and impairment that are to be answered “yes” or “no”. The severity of PGD symptoms can be evaluated by summing the scores obtained from these 11 items, leading to a sum score range of 11–55. Higher scores indicate more severe grief symptoms. To meet the criteria for PGD symptoms according to Prigerson et al. [6], the participant had to experience separation distress (one out of two items scored with 4 or 5) and cognitive, emotional, and behavioral symptoms (five out of nine items scored with 4 or 5). Furthermore, the symptoms had to be elevated for at least six months (symptom duration ≥ six months), and the participant must have significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning [6]. The PG-13 has been demonstrated to be reliable and valid [23]. Cronbach’s alpha in the present study indicated excellent internal consistency for the PG-13 (α = .94).

Depressive and anxiety symptoms.

The Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) was used to assess core symptoms of depression (PHQ-2) and core symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-2) with two items each. The four items are rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), leading to sum score ranges between 0 and 6 for both subscales. The PHQ-4 demonstrated good psychometric properties and serves as a screening instrument for depressive and anxiety disorders (PHQ-2 and GAD-2 ≥ 3) [24]. Higher scores indicate higher degrees of depressive and anxiety symptoms [25]. The internal consistencies of the PHQ-4, PHQ-2 and the GAD-2 were good to acceptable in the present study (α = 0.87; α = 0.79; α = 0.80, respectively).

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, version 25 (IBM® SPSS®), including the software Analysis of Moment Structures, version 25 (IBM® SPSS® Amos). The significance level was set to α = .05.

Item analyses.

We examined the item descriptives, item difficulties (in %) using the formula p_i = ((−min(x_i))/(max(x_i)-min(x_i))*100 (with = mean of item i; min(x_i) = minimal value on item i; max(x_i) = maximum value on item i), corrected item-total-correlations, and percentages of missing values.

Reliability.

Scale reliability was determined via internal consistency. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach’s α with α ≥ .70 indicating acceptable reliability. Mean inter-item correlations were calculated as an indicator of subscale homogeneity.

Construct validity.

Factor analysis. The internal factor structure of the DAAPGQ as an indicator of construct validity was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) based on structure equation modeling using the software AMOS, version 25. We predicted a two-factor model with two correlated latent variables (DA and AA). As the χ2-test as a global measure for the model fit is largely influenced by sample size, the following close fit indices and corresponding cut-off criteria were additionally used to evaluate the model fit:(1) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) including the 90% confidence interval, with values ≤ .05 indicating good model fit, values between .05 and .08 indicating an acceptable fit, (2) Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), with values < .10 indicating acceptable and values < .05 indicating good model fit, and (3) Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and (4) Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), with values > .95 indicating acceptable and ≥ .97 indicating good model fit [26, 27]. As the original model assuming two correlated factors and uncorrelated errors showed only partially acceptable fit to the data, minor modifications to the model were necessary. Therefore, the total sample was split into two random samples using the SPSS 25 random selection procedure. Model modifications, guided by an inspection of modification indices and only included if they were theoretically plausible, were performed in the first split-half sample and the final model was then cross-validated in the second split-half sample.

Convergent validity. Convergent validity was assessed as an indicator of construct validity by calculating Pearson’s correlation coefficients between subscales of the DAAPGQ and theoretically related constructs, i.e. PGD symptoms (PG-13) and depressive and anxiety symptoms (PHQ-4). We predicted both subscales DA and AA to be positively correlated with these measures. Furthermore, we predicted that DA and AA would marginally diminish over time and therefore negatively correlate with time since loss.

Additionally, a hierarchical regression analysis was performed to further establish construct validity. We expected that DA and AA would predict symptoms of PGD, even after controlling for sociodemographic variables, variables related to the loss, and the relationship to the deceased. Only participants who fulfilled the ICD-11 time criterion (time since loss ≥6 months) were included in this analysis. Four blocks of independent variables were entered hierarchically in order of their point in time related to the loss (pre-loss, loss, peri-loss): sociodemographic variables (age, gender); variables related to the loss (time since loss, number of losses, cause of death); relationship to the deceased; and DA and AA. Dummy variables were generated for the categorical variables cause of death and relationship to the deceased. Reference groups were anticipated natural death (e.g., illness) and losing a parent, respectively. The categories of accident, suicide, and violent death were grouped into sudden violent death. The variance inflation factor was calculated for the diagnosis of multicollinearity. Values above 5 were considered as an indication of multicollinearity [28].

Results

Participant and loss-related characteristics

A total of 1371 (54.2%) individuals reported having experienced a major bereavement. Table 1 gives an overview of the demographic characteristics of the bereaved sample. Loss-related characteristics are displayed in Table 2. Bereaved individuals were aged between 14 and 93 years (M = 54.56, SD = 17.28). About 59% were women, about 56% were living with a partner, and the great majority (97.1%) reported German nationality (Table 1). The time since the loss of the significant person ranged between 0 and 976 months (M = 128.14, SD = 138.11). About 40% indicated the time since the loss to be greater than 10 years. The majority (46.6%) reported to have lost a parent, and sudden natural death was reported most frequently (44.7%) as the cause of death (Table 2). According to the diagnostic algorithm of the PG-13, 3.3% (n = 45) met the criteria for clinically relevant PGD symptoms. Those with relevant PGD symptoms were mostly female (71%; n = 32), mean age was 61.09 (SD = 18.80), mean time since loss was 69.91 months (range: 7–456 months, SD = 100.31). About half of them reported to have lost a partner (n = 23), and a quarter lost a parent (n = 11), 9% lost their child (n = 4). The most frequently indicated cause of death was a disease (n = 21), followed by sudden natural deaths (n = 16).

Download:

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the bereaved sample.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t001

Download:

Table 2. Loss-related characteristics of the bereaved sample.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t002

Item analyses

The item characteristics of the German version of the DAAPGQ are displayed in Table 3. Item means on the eight-point response scale (range 1–8) ranged from 1.79 (item 3) to 3.01 (item 9). All items were positively skewed. Skewness ranged from 0.76 (item 9) to 2.22 (item 3). Seven items showed a positive and two items (8, 9) a negative kurtosis. Kurtosis ranged from -0.70 (item 9) to 4.39 (item 3). Item difficulties ranged between 13.19% (item 3) and 33.51% (item 9), indicating a low to medium probability of scores > 1 (‘not at all true for me‘). Corrected item-total-correlations were high (0.60 ≤ r_it ≤ 0.79), indicating an adequate discriminatory power. The percentage of missing values was low (≤ 0.95%) for all items.

Download:

Table 3. Psychometric properties of the DAAPGQ items.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t003

Internal factor structure

CFAs were performed for cases with complete data in the DAAPGQ, resulting in a total sample of N = 1345. The original model assuming a two-factor model with uncorrelated errors in the total sample showed contradictory findings. While some indices indicated an acceptable fit to the data (CFI = .970, TLI = .958; SRMR = .057) the inspection of the RMSEA (RMSEA = .096, 90%CI: .087,.105) and the χ2-test (χ2 = 349.401, p > .001) indicated poor model fit. Therefore, minor model modifications were performed in the first split-half sample (n = 672). The final model, allowing for correlations of unique variances between two items from the depressive avoidances scale (items 3 and 4, items 4 and 5) as well as between two items from the anxious avoidance scale (items 6 and 8, items 7 and 9), showed a good fit to the data in the first split-half sample (χ2 = 95.529, p < .001; CFI = .987; TLI = .978; RMSEA = .071, 90%CI: .056,.085; SRMR = .023). These correlations were considered theoretically plausible due to similarities of the wording in these items and the overlaps in content, which may display a non-random measurement error. The cross-validation in the second split-half sample (N = 673) confirmed the good fit to the data (χ2 = 101.601, p < .001; CFI = .985; TLI = .976; RMSEA = .073, 90%CI: .059,.088; SRMR = .034). Because the χ2-test is strongly influenced by sample size, we did not take it into account as a global measure of model fit.

Descriptive data and reliability

Table 4 presents the descriptive data for both subscales for the total sample and participants with and without PGD symptoms, according to the diagnostic algorithm of the PG-13. In the total sample, both subscales were positively skewed. The kurtosis for DA was also positive, for AA slightly negative. Cronbach’s α was .95 for DA, and .86 for AA.

Download:

Table 4. Descriptive data of the DAAPGQ subscales.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t004

Mean inter-item correlations were .81 for DA and .61 for AA. A significant correlation between the two subscales was found, with r = .55 (p < .001).

Convergent validity

As expected, the subscales of the DAAPGQ were significantly correlated with symptoms of prolonged grief, depression, and anxiety and negatively with time since loss. All correlations are presented in Table 5. The highest positive correlation was found between the DA subscale and the PG-13 with r = .739, the lowest between AA and time since loss (r = -.204).

Download:

Table 5. Bivariate correlations between subscales of the DAAPGQ and theoretically related constructs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t005

Furthermore, the results of the regression analysis demonstrate that DA and AA predict symptoms of PGD, even after controlling for sociodemographic variables, variables related to the loss, and the relationship to the deceased. The results are summarized in Table 6. The sociodemographic variables in step 1 explained 2.9% of the variance. Entering variables related to the loss (step 2) increased the explained variance to 9.6%. The third step (relationship to the deceased) led to an explained variance of 19.6%. DA and AA were entered in the last step, improving the model with changes in R² of 39.8%. The final model explained 59.4% of variance (F (11,1156) = 153.744, p < .001), which can be considered a large effect size, according to Cohen [29].

Download:

Table 6. Results of hierarchical regression for predictors of PGD symptoms (n = 1168).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.t006

All VIF values were below 5, which means there was no indication of multicollinearity. The standardized regression coefficient showed that DA and AA provided a significant contribution to symptoms of PGD. More DA (ß = .61, p < .001), and more AA (ß = .18, p < .001) were associated with higher levels of prolonged grief symptoms.

Discussion

The DAAPGQ measures avoidance behavior after the loss of a loved one and consists of the subscales depressive and anxious avoidance. This study aimed to provide a German version of the DAAPGQ and evaluate its psychometric properties and validity in a large sample of bereaved individuals drawn from a representative sample of the German general population. We also provide descriptive data on DAAPGQ scales which may help users of the DAAPGQ interpret their findings in relation to this normative representative sample.

The percentage of missing values in DAAPGQ items was very low (≤ 0.95%), indicating that the items were very well accepted by the study participants. Item descriptives showed that item distributions were positively skewed for both subscales, and corrected item-total correlations were high. Item difficulties were medium to high (range: 13.19–33.51%). Especially the items tapping depressive avoidance were rather difficult. When interpreting this fact, it is important to keep in mind that the questionnaire focuses on DA and AA in PGD and that both are correlates of PGD symptoms [14]. It is therefore plausible that some items are more relevant to a minority of bereaved experiencing a more persisting and disabling grief reaction. This is illustrated by our findings that participants with PGD symptoms reported much higher levels of DA and AA than participants without PGD symptoms. The more difficult items may have discriminatory power between people with and without PGD symptoms. In addition, the internal consistencies of the subscales of the DAAPGQ were good to excellent in this study and comparable to internal consistencies found for the original version in other studies [e.g., 15, 16].

With regard to the factorial validity and internal factor structure of the DAAPGQ, our study replicated the findings by Boelen and Van Den Bout [14], supporting a two-factor model with two distinct but correlated factors. To improve the model fit, we allowed for correlated error-terms for two items of each subscale. We consider these correlations theoretically plausible due to the overlaps in content and similarities of the wording in these items, which may display a non-random measurement error. This result supports the distinction of depressive and anxious avoidance in the cognitive-behavioral model of PGD symptoms [9, 14].

The validity of the DAAPGQ was further supported by this study. As expected, the subscales DA and AA only slightly diminished over time, as evidenced by the negative but mild correlation with time since the loss. This indicates that avoidance tendencies once manifested remain somewhat stable over time, which may contribute to the development of PGD. This result also replicates the findings by Boelen and Van Den Bout [14].

Additionally, both DA and AA were significantly and positively correlated to symptoms of PGD, depression, and anxiety. This is consistent with previous research and theoretical considerations that regard avoidance as a mechanism that fosters and maintains PGD symptoms [9]. Furthermore, PGD symptoms, in turn, are also associated with anxiety and depression [30]. Since DA and AA are thought to contribute to the development of PGD, we hypothesized that both should also correlate with depression and anxiety. Furthermore, avoidance behavior has been found a key mechanism in the maintenance of both depression and anxiety [31, 32].

The results of the regression analysis further demonstrated that both DA and AA predict symptoms of PGD. This association remains, even after controlling for sociodemographic variables, variables related to the loss and the relationship to the deceased. DA and AA explain almost 40% of the variance, which is a large proportion, underlining the importance of avoidance as an independent mechanism. All these results provide evidence for the validity of the DAAPGQ.

A major strength of this study is the large representative sample of the German general population, which extends the findings from Boelen and Van Den Bout [14] to a representative sample. This allows for the provision of normative descriptive data, which may help future users of the DAAPGQ interpret their findings in relation to our data and improve the applicability of the DAAPGQ with regard to individual diagnostics.

Major limitations are the cross-sectional design and the lack of data on retest-reliability and sensitivity to change, which is of particular importance when using the DAAPGQ in intervention studies. Furthermore, only a limited number of constructs were used to calculate construct validity, and no other measures of loss-related avoidance or general avoidance such as the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II [AAQ-II, 33] were applied to evaluate convergent validity. Lastly, we used the PG-13 to assess PGD symptoms. Even though it is one of the most widely used and well-established instruments for assessing PGD symptoms, its items do not assess all of the current PGD criteria included in the ICD-11 (nor the DSM-5-TR). At the time of assessment, there was no tool available capturing all the PGD ICD-11 criteria [23]. Thus, we recommend future research to assess PGD according to the latest ICD-11 criteria to provide more accurate normative, descriptive data of the DAAPGQ.

Implications and conclusion

Despite these limitations, we can conclude that the DAAPGQ demonstrated good psychometric properties, and factorial and construct validity were established. Thus, the DAAPGQ can be considered a reliable and valid tool to assess grief-related avoidance after losing a loved one. We, therefore, recommend the use of the German version in German-speaking countries. As prior study results suggest, reducing DA and AA should be central within psychological interventions for persistent distress following the loss of a loved one [14, 15]. Targeted interventions adapted to the needs of the bereaved might be most efficacious. Thus, more knowledge on the isolated effectiveness of interventions targeting DA and AA might be beneficial. There is already preliminary evidence that interventions targeting DA are effective [34]. The DAAPGQ could also serve as a tool to assess treatment progress by monitoring the scores during the course of treatment. For this, however, the sensitivity to change of the DAAPGQ should be investigated first, which we recommend for future research. As the DAAPGQ is short with only nine items, it should be easy to implement within efficacy or effectiveness research of grief therapy.

Supporting information

S1 File.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.s001

(DOCX)

S1 Table.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254959.s002

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge support from Leipzig University for Open Access Publishing.

References

1. Lundorff M, Holmgren H, Zachariae R, Farver-Vestergaard I, O’Connor M. Prevalence of prolonged grief disorder in adult bereavement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2017 Apr;212:138–49. pmid:28167398
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
2. Djelantik AAAMJ Smid GE, Mroz A Kleber RJ, Boelen PA. The prevalence of prolonged grief disorder in bereaved individuals following unnatural losses: Systematic review and meta regression analysis. J Affect Disord. 2020 Mar;265:146–56. pmid:32090736
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
3. Prigerson HG, Boelen PA, Xu J, Smith KV, Maciejewski PK. Validation of the new DSM‐5‐TR criteria for prolonged grief disorder and the PG‐13‐Revised (PG‐13‐R) scale. World Psychiatry. 2021 Feb;20(1):96–106. pmid:33432758
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Horowitz MJ, Bonanno GA, Holen A. Pathological grief: diagnosis and explanation. : Psychosomatic Medicine. Psychosom Med. 1993;3(55):260–73. pmid:8346334
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Horowitz MJ, Siegel B, Holen A, Bonanno GA, Milbrath C, Stinson CH. Diagnostic criteria for complicated grief disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1997 Jul;154(7):904–10. pmid:9210739
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. Prigerson HG, Horowitz MJ, Jacobs SC, Parkes CM, Aslan M, Goodkin K, et al. Prolonged grief disorder: psychometric validation of criteria proposed for DSM-V and ICD-11. PLOS Med. 2009 Aug 4;6(8):e1000121. pmid:19652695
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Wash DC Am Psychiatr Publ. 2013;(5th).
- View Article
- Google Scholar
8. Shear K, Simon N, Wall M, Zisook S, Neimeyer R, Duan N, et al. Complicated grief and related bereavement issues for DSM-5. Depress Anxiety. 2011 Feb 1;28(2):103–17. pmid:21284063
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
9. Boelen PA, Van Den Hout MA, Van Den Bout J. A Cognitive-Behavioral Conceptualization of Complicated Grief. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2006 May 1;13(2):109–28.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
10. Boelen PA, de Keijser J, van den Hout MA, van den Bout J. Treatment of complicated grief: A comparison between cognitive-behavioral therapy and supportive counseling. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2007;75(2):277–84. pmid:17469885
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
11. Rosner R, Pfoh G, Kotoučová M, Hagl M. Efficacy of an outpatient treatment for prolonged grief disorder: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Affect Disord. 2014 Oct 1;167:56–63. pmid:25082115
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Shear K, Frank E, Houck PR, Reynolds CF. Treatment of Complicated Grief: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2005 Jun 1;293(21):2601. pmid:15928281
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Boelen PA, Eisma MC. Anxious and depressive avoidance behavior in post-loss psychopathology: a longitudinal study. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2015 Sep 3;28(5):587–600. pmid:25567154
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
14. Boelen PA, Van Den Bout J. Anxious and Depressive Avoidance and Symptoms of Prolonged Grief, Depression, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Psychol Belg. 2010;50(1–2):49–67.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
15. Boelen PA, de Keijser J, Smid G. Cognitive–behavioral variables mediate the impact of violent loss on post-loss psychopathology. Psychol Trauma Theory Res Pract Policy. 2015;7(4):382–90. pmid:26147521
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
16. Boelen PA, van Denderen M, de Keijser J. Prolonged Grief, Posttraumatic Stress, Anger, and Revenge Phenomena Following Homicidal Loss: The Role of Negative Cognitions and Avoidance Behaviors. Homicide Stud. 2016 May;20(2):177–95.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
17. Eisma MC, Lang TA de, Boelen PA. How thinking hurts: Rumination, worry, and avoidance processes in adjustment to bereavement. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2020;27(4):548–58. pmid:32103569
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
18. Eisma MC, Stroebe MS, Schut HAW, Stroebe W, Boelen PA, van den Bout J. Avoidance Processes Mediate the Relationship Between Rumination and Symptoms of Complicated Grief and Depression Following Loss. J Abnorm Psychol. 2013 Nov;122(4):961–70. pmid:24364599
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
19. Boelen PA, Prigerson HG. The influence of symptoms of prolonged grief disorder, depression, and anxiety on quality of life among bereaved adults: A prospective study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2007 Dec;257(8):444–52. pmid:17629728
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Boelen PA, Van Den Bout J. Complicated grief, depression, and anxiety as distinct postloss syndromes: a confirmatory factor analysis study. Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Nov;162(11):2175–7. pmid:16263861
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
21. Prigerson HG, Bierhals AJ, Reynolds CF, Shear KM, Newsom JT, Jacobs S. Complicated grief as a disorder distinct from bereavement-related depression and anxiety: a replication study. Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Nov;153(11):1484–6. pmid:8890686
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
22. Schaal S, Dusingizemungu J-P, Jacob N, Neuner F, Elbert T. Associations between prolonged grief disorder, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and anxiety in Rwandan genocide survivors. Death Stud. 2012 Feb;36(2):97–117. pmid:24567983
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Treml J, Kaiser J, Plexnies A, Kersting A. Assessing prolonged grief disorder: A systematic review of assessment instruments. J Affect Disord. 2020 Sep;274:420–34. pmid:32663972
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
24. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Löwe B. An Ultra-Brief Screening Scale for Anxiety and Depression: The PHQ–4. Psychosomatics. 2009 Nov;50(6):613–21. pmid:19996233
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, Spitzer C, Glaesmer H, Wingenfeld K, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: Validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2010 Apr;122(1–2):86–95. pmid:19616305
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
26. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999 Jan;6(1):1–55.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
27. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Fourth edition. New York: The Guilford Press; 2016. 534 p. (Methodology in the social sciences).
28. Urban D, Mayerl J. Regressionsanalyse: Theorie, Technik und Anwendung [Internet]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften; 2011 [cited 2019 Aug 6]. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-531-93114-2
29. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum; 1988.
30. Simon NM, Shear KM, Thompson EH, Zalta AK, Perlman C, Reynolds CF, et al. The prevalence and correlates of psychiatric comorbidity in individuals with complicated grief. Compr Psychiatry. 2007 Oct;48(5):395–9. pmid:17707245
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
31. Pittig A, Treanor M, LeBeau RT, Craske MG. The role of associative fear and avoidance learning in anxiety disorders: Gaps and directions for future research. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 May;88:117–40. pmid:29550209
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
32. Ottenbreit ND, Dobson KS. Avoidance and depression: the construction of the Cognitive–Behavioral Avoidance Scale. Behav Res Ther. 2004 Mar;42(3):293–313. pmid:14975771
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Guenole N, Orcutt HK, et al. Preliminary Psychometric Properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II: A Revised Measure of Psychological Inflexibility and Experiential Avoidance. Behav Ther. 2011 Dec 1;42(4):676–88. pmid:22035996
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Papa A, Sewell MT, Garrison-Diehn C, Rummel C. A Randomized Open Trial Assessing the Feasibility of Behavioral Activation for Pathological Grief Responding. Behav Ther. 2013 Dec;44(4):639–50. pmid:24094789
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Lundorff M, Holmgren H, Zachariae R, Farver-Vestergaard I, O’Connor M. Prevalence of prolonged grief disorder in adult bereavement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2017 Apr;212:138–49. pmid:28167398
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] PubMed/NCBI

[4] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Djelantik AAAMJ Smid GE, Mroz A Kleber RJ, Boelen PA. The prevalence of prolonged grief disorder in bereaved individuals following unnatural losses: Systematic review and meta regression analysis. J Affect Disord. 2020 Mar;265:146–56. pmid:32090736
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[6] View Article

[7] PubMed/NCBI

[8] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Prigerson HG, Boelen PA, Xu J, Smith KV, Maciejewski PK. Validation of the new DSM‐5‐TR criteria for prolonged grief disorder and the PG‐13‐Revised (PG‐13‐R) scale. World Psychiatry. 2021 Feb;20(1):96–106. pmid:33432758
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[10] View Article

[11] PubMed/NCBI

[12] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Horowitz MJ, Bonanno GA, Holen A. Pathological grief: diagnosis and explanation. : Psychosomatic Medicine. Psychosom Med. 1993;3(55):260–73. pmid:8346334
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[14] View Article

[15] PubMed/NCBI

[16] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Horowitz MJ, Siegel B, Holen A, Bonanno GA, Milbrath C, Stinson CH. Diagnostic criteria for complicated grief disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1997 Jul;154(7):904–10. pmid:9210739
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[18] View Article

[19] PubMed/NCBI

[20] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Prigerson HG, Horowitz MJ, Jacobs SC, Parkes CM, Aslan M, Goodkin K, et al. Prolonged grief disorder: psychometric validation of criteria proposed for DSM-V and ICD-11. PLOS Med. 2009 Aug 4;6(8):e1000121. pmid:19652695
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[22] View Article

[23] PubMed/NCBI

[24] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Wash DC Am Psychiatr Publ. 2013;(5th).
View Article
Google Scholar

[26] View Article

[27] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Shear K, Simon N, Wall M, Zisook S, Neimeyer R, Duan N, et al. Complicated grief and related bereavement issues for DSM-5. Depress Anxiety. 2011 Feb 1;28(2):103–17. pmid:21284063
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[29] View Article

[30] PubMed/NCBI

[31] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Boelen PA, Van Den Hout MA, Van Den Bout J. A Cognitive-Behavioral Conceptualization of Complicated Grief. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2006 May 1;13(2):109–28.
View Article
Google Scholar

[33] View Article

[34] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Boelen PA, de Keijser J, van den Hout MA, van den Bout J. Treatment of complicated grief: A comparison between cognitive-behavioral therapy and supportive counseling. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2007;75(2):277–84. pmid:17469885
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[36] View Article

[37] PubMed/NCBI

[38] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Rosner R, Pfoh G, Kotoučová M, Hagl M. Efficacy of an outpatient treatment for prolonged grief disorder: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Affect Disord. 2014 Oct 1;167:56–63. pmid:25082115
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[40] View Article

[41] PubMed/NCBI

[42] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Shear K, Frank E, Houck PR, Reynolds CF. Treatment of Complicated Grief: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2005 Jun 1;293(21):2601. pmid:15928281
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[44] View Article

[45] PubMed/NCBI

[46] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Boelen PA, Eisma MC. Anxious and depressive avoidance behavior in post-loss psychopathology: a longitudinal study. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2015 Sep 3;28(5):587–600. pmid:25567154
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[48] View Article

[49] PubMed/NCBI

[50] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Boelen PA, Van Den Bout J. Anxious and Depressive Avoidance and Symptoms of Prolonged Grief, Depression, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Psychol Belg. 2010;50(1–2):49–67.
View Article
Google Scholar

[52] View Article

[53] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Boelen PA, de Keijser J, Smid G. Cognitive–behavioral variables mediate the impact of violent loss on post-loss psychopathology. Psychol Trauma Theory Res Pract Policy. 2015;7(4):382–90. pmid:26147521
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[55] View Article

[56] PubMed/NCBI

[57] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Boelen PA, van Denderen M, de Keijser J. Prolonged Grief, Posttraumatic Stress, Anger, and Revenge Phenomena Following Homicidal Loss: The Role of Negative Cognitions and Avoidance Behaviors. Homicide Stud. 2016 May;20(2):177–95.
View Article
Google Scholar

[59] View Article

[60] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Eisma MC, Lang TA de, Boelen PA. How thinking hurts: Rumination, worry, and avoidance processes in adjustment to bereavement. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2020;27(4):548–58. pmid:32103569
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[62] View Article

[63] PubMed/NCBI

[64] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Eisma MC, Stroebe MS, Schut HAW, Stroebe W, Boelen PA, van den Bout J. Avoidance Processes Mediate the Relationship Between Rumination and Symptoms of Complicated Grief and Depression Following Loss. J Abnorm Psychol. 2013 Nov;122(4):961–70. pmid:24364599
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[66] View Article

[67] PubMed/NCBI

[68] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Boelen PA, Prigerson HG. The influence of symptoms of prolonged grief disorder, depression, and anxiety on quality of life among bereaved adults: A prospective study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2007 Dec;257(8):444–52. pmid:17629728
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[70] View Article

[71] PubMed/NCBI

[72] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Boelen PA, Van Den Bout J. Complicated grief, depression, and anxiety as distinct postloss syndromes: a confirmatory factor analysis study. Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Nov;162(11):2175–7. pmid:16263861
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[74] View Article

[75] PubMed/NCBI

[76] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Prigerson HG, Bierhals AJ, Reynolds CF, Shear KM, Newsom JT, Jacobs S. Complicated grief as a disorder distinct from bereavement-related depression and anxiety: a replication study. Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Nov;153(11):1484–6. pmid:8890686
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[78] View Article

[79] PubMed/NCBI

[80] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Schaal S, Dusingizemungu J-P, Jacob N, Neuner F, Elbert T. Associations between prolonged grief disorder, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and anxiety in Rwandan genocide survivors. Death Stud. 2012 Feb;36(2):97–117. pmid:24567983
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[82] View Article

[83] PubMed/NCBI

[84] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Treml J, Kaiser J, Plexnies A, Kersting A. Assessing prolonged grief disorder: A systematic review of assessment instruments. J Affect Disord. 2020 Sep;274:420–34. pmid:32663972
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[86] View Article

[87] PubMed/NCBI

[88] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Löwe B. An Ultra-Brief Screening Scale for Anxiety and Depression: The PHQ–4. Psychosomatics. 2009 Nov;50(6):613–21. pmid:19996233
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[90] View Article

[91] PubMed/NCBI

[92] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Löwe B, Wahl I, Rose M, Spitzer C, Glaesmer H, Wingenfeld K, et al. A 4-item measure of depression and anxiety: Validation and standardization of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2010 Apr;122(1–2):86–95. pmid:19616305
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[94] View Article

[95] PubMed/NCBI

[96] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999 Jan;6(1):1–55.
View Article
Google Scholar

[98] View Article

[99] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Fourth edition. New York: The Guilford Press; 2016. 534 p. (Methodology in the social sciences).

[ref28] 28. Urban D, Mayerl J. Regressionsanalyse: Theorie, Technik und Anwendung [Internet]. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften; 2011 [cited 2019 Aug 6]. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-531-93114-2

[ref29] 29. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum; 1988.

[ref30] 30. Simon NM, Shear KM, Thompson EH, Zalta AK, Perlman C, Reynolds CF, et al. The prevalence and correlates of psychiatric comorbidity in individuals with complicated grief. Compr Psychiatry. 2007 Oct;48(5):395–9. pmid:17707245
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[104] View Article

[105] PubMed/NCBI

[106] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. Pittig A, Treanor M, LeBeau RT, Craske MG. The role of associative fear and avoidance learning in anxiety disorders: Gaps and directions for future research. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 May;88:117–40. pmid:29550209
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[108] View Article

[109] PubMed/NCBI

[110] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Ottenbreit ND, Dobson KS. Avoidance and depression: the construction of the Cognitive–Behavioral Avoidance Scale. Behav Res Ther. 2004 Mar;42(3):293–313. pmid:14975771
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[112] View Article

[113] PubMed/NCBI

[114] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Guenole N, Orcutt HK, et al. Preliminary Psychometric Properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire–II: A Revised Measure of Psychological Inflexibility and Experiential Avoidance. Behav Ther. 2011 Dec 1;42(4):676–88. pmid:22035996
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[116] View Article

[117] PubMed/NCBI

[118] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Papa A, Sewell MT, Garrison-Diehn C, Rummel C. A Randomized Open Trial Assessing the Feasibility of Behavioral Activation for Pathological Grief Responding. Behav Ther. 2013 Dec;44(4):639–50. pmid:24094789
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[120] View Article

[121] PubMed/NCBI

[122] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Procedures

Participants

Measures

Sociodemographic information.

Depressive and Anxious Avoidance in Prolonged Grief Disorder (DAAPGQ).

Symptoms of prolonged grief disorder.

Depressive and anxiety symptoms.

Statistical analysis

Item analyses.

Reliability.

Construct validity.

Results

Participant and loss-related characteristics

Item analyses

Internal factor structure

Descriptive data and reliability

Convergent validity

Discussion

Implications and conclusion

Supporting information

S1 File.

S1 Table.

Acknowledgments

References