Peer support for traumatic injury survivors: a scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Peers are uniquely able to draw on their lived experiences to support trauma survivors’ recovery. By understanding the functions and outcomes of peer support and the factors that impact implementation, evidence can be mobilized to enhance its application and uptake into standard practice. As such, we aimed to review the literature on peer support for trauma survivors to: examine the role of peer support in recovery; describe the nature and extent of peer support; Examine the influence of peer support on health and well-being; and identify the barriers and facilitators to developing and implementing peer support. Scoping review methodology as outlined by Arksey and O’Malley. Ninety-three articles were reviewed. Peer support was highlighted as an important component of care for trauma survivors and provided hope and guidance for the future post-injury. Most peer support programs were offered in the community and provided one-on-one support from peer mentors using various modalities. Interventions were successful when they involved knowledgeable peer mentors and maintained participant engagement. Prior negative experiences and stigma/privacy concerns deterred trauma survivors from participating. Peer support fulfills several functions throughout trauma survivors’ recovery that may not otherwise be met within existing health care systems. Implications for rehabilitationBy understanding the functions and outcomes and the factors that impact implementation of peer support, evidence can be mobilized to enhance its application and uptake into standard practice.Peers provide trauma survivors with socioemotional support as well as assistance in daily management and life navigation post-injury.Peer support provided hope and guidance for the future after injury and improved self-efficacy amongst trauma survivors.Peer support programs are most likely to be successful when they involve knowledgeable peer mentors, are flexibly delivered, align with organizations’ values and priorities, and have adequate resources and funding to support their implementation. By understanding the functions and outcomes and the factors that impact implementation of peer support, evidence can be mobilized to enhance its application and uptake into standard practice. Peers provide trauma survivors with socioemotional support as well as assistance in daily management and life navigation post-injury. Peer support provided hope and guidance for the future after injury and improved self-efficacy amongst trauma survivors. Peer support programs are most likely to be successful when they involve knowledgeable peer mentors, are flexibly delivered, align with organizations’ values and priorities, and have adequate resources and funding to support their implementation.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,015 | 0,061 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,021 | 0,019 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».