Selman Lucy E, Turner Nicholas, Dawson Lesel, Chamberlain Charlotte, Mustan Aisling, Rivett Alison, Fox Fiona
Palliative and End of Life Care Research Group, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 39 Canynge Hall, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
Bristol Population Health Science Institute and Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Palliat Care Soc Pract. 2023 Jul 30;17:26323524231189523. doi: 10.1177/26323524231189523. eCollection 2023.
Good Grief Festival was originally planned as a face-to-face festival about grief and bereavement. Due to COVID-19, it was held online over 3 days in October 2020.
To evaluate the festival's reach and impact.
Pre/post evaluation.
Pre-festival online surveys assessed reasons for attending and attitudes to bereavement across four items (fear of saying the wrong thing, avoiding talking to someone bereaved, knowing what to do if someone bereaved was struggling, knowing how to help). Post-festival online surveys evaluated audience experiences and the four attitude items. Free-text responses, analysed using thematic analysis, generated suggestions for improvement and general comments.
Between 5003 and 6438 people attended, with most attending two to five events. Pre-festival survey participants ( = 3785) were mostly women (91%) and White (91%). About 9% were from Black or minoritised ethnic communities. About 14% were age ⩾65 years, 16% age ⩽34 years. Around 75% were members of the public, teachers, students or 'other'; 25% academics, clinicians or bereavement counsellors. A third had been bereaved in the last year; 6% had never been bereaved. People attended to learn about grief/bereavement (77%), be inspired (52%) and feel part of a community (49%). Post-festival participants ( = 685) reported feeling part of a community (68%), learning about grief/bereavement (68%) and being inspired (66%). 89% rated the festival as excellent/very good and 75% agreed that they felt more confident talking about grief after attending. Higher ratings and confidence were associated with attending more events. Post-festival attitudes were improved across all four items ( < 0.001). Attendees appreciated the festival, particularly valuing the online format, opportunities for connection during lockdown and the diversity and quality of speakers. Suggestions included improving registration, more interactive events and less content.
Good Grief Festival successfully reached a large public audience, with benefit in engagement, confidence and community-building. Evaluation was critical in shaping future events. Findings suggest festivals of this nature can play a central role in increasing death- and grief-literacy within a public health approach.
“悲伤有益节”最初计划为一个关于悲伤和丧亲之痛的面对面节日。由于新冠疫情,该节日于2020年10月以线上形式举办了3天。
评估该节日的影响力和效果。
节前/节后评估。
节前在线调查评估了参与原因以及对丧亲之痛的态度,涉及四个项目(担心说错话、避免与丧亲者交谈、知道丧亲者挣扎时该怎么做、知道如何提供帮助)。节后在线调查评估了观众体验以及这四个态度项目。通过主题分析对自由文本回复进行分析,得出改进建议和总体评价。
有5003至6438人参加,大多数人参加了两到五项活动。节前调查参与者(n = 3785)大多为女性(91%)和白人(91%)。约9%来自黑人群体或少数族裔社区。约14%年龄≥65岁,16%年龄≤34岁。约75%是公众、教师、学生或“其他人员”;25%是学者、临床医生或丧亲辅导员。三分之一的人在过去一年中经历过丧亲之痛;6%从未经历过丧亲之痛。人们参加活动是为了了解悲伤/丧亲之痛(77%)、获得启发(52%)以及感受社区归属感(49%)。节后参与者(n = 685)报告称有社区归属感(68%)、了解了悲伤/丧亲之痛(68%)并受到了启发(66%)。89%的人将该节日评为优秀/非常好,75%的人同意参加后他们在谈论悲伤时更有信心。更高的评分和信心与参加更多活动相关。节后在所有四个项目上的态度都有所改善(P < 0.001)。参与者对该节日表示赞赏,尤其重视线上形式、封锁期间的交流机会以及演讲者的多样性和质量。建议包括改进注册流程、举办更多互动活动以及减少内容。
“悲伤有益节”成功吸引了大量公众,在参与度、信心和社区建设方面取得了成效。评估对未来活动的规划至关重要。研究结果表明,这类节日在以公共卫生方式提高死亡和悲伤知识水平方面可以发挥核心作用。