Performance of DSM-5 Persistent Complex Bereavement Disorder Criteria in a Community Sample of Bereaved Military Family Members

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to examine the accuracy of DSM-5 proposed criteria for persistent complex bereavement disorder in identifying putative cases of clinically impairing grief and in excluding nonclinical cases. Performance of criteria sets for prolonged grief disorder and complicated grief were similarly assessed. METHOD: Participants were family members of U.S. military service members who died of any cause since September 11, 2001 (N=1,732). Putative clinical and nonclinical samples were derived from this community sample using cutoff scores from the Inventory of Complicated Grief and the Work and Social Adjustment Scale. Items from a self-report grief measure (Complicated Grief Questionnaire) were matched to DSM-5 persistent complex bereavement disorder, prolonged grief disorder, and complicated grief criteria. Endorsed items were used to identify cases. RESULTS: Criteria sets varied in their ability to identify clinical cases. DSM-5 persistent complex bereavement disorder criteria identified 53%, prolonged grief disorder criteria identified 59%, and complicated grief criteria identified more than 90% of putative clinical cases. All criteria sets accurately excluded virtually all nonclinical grief cases and accurately excluded depression in the absence of clinical grief. CONCLUSIONS: The DSM-5 persistent complex bereavement disorder criteria accurately exclude nonclinical, normative grief, but also exclude nearly half of clinical cases, whereas complicated grief criteria exclude nonclinical cases while identifying more than 90% of clinical cases. The authors conclude that significant modification is needed to improve case identification by DSM-5 persistent complex bereavement disorder diagnostic criteria. Complicated grief criteria are superior in accurately identifying clinically impairing grief.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 76 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.