Peer worker or client?: conflicting identities among peer workers engaged in harm reduction service delivery
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: This study sought to identify challenges surrounding peer programming in Ottawa and to provide realistic recommendations for reducing these barriers.Methods: In-person, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with managers of peer programming initiatives and people with lived experience of drug use who had previously been or were currently engaged in peer programming in Ottawa. Interviews were transcribed and coded for emergent themes using thematic analysis informed by grounded theory.Results: Eleven interviews were held with peer workers and six were held with program managers between January and March 2016. A number of emergent themes were identified, but an overarching message emerged about peer workers’ difficulties separating their identities as people who use drugs and require harm reduction services from their identities as peer workers working in harm reduction to help others who use drugs. This manifested in difficulty reporting issues of triggering, reluctance to use the agency’s harm reduction services, and feeling ‘stuck’ in positions that were dependent on a ‘drug user’ identity.Conclusion: The themes explored by peer workers in this study, particularly those of conflicting identities and the pressure to perform, contribute substantially to the evidence base on peer workers in harm reduction. We explore these themes through a symbolic interactionist lens, which notes that one’s sense of self-worth is often intrinsically linked with one’s ability to successfully perform a given identity. Collaboration between agencies in supporting peer workers and reminding them of their ongoing ability to use agency services as a client at the agency where they are employed or elsewhere, along with offering training sessions to help peer workers develop skills outside of harm reduction work may be beneficial in alleviating these challenges.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,033 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle