MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4402276336 · doi:10.1186/s40337-024-01068-y

Peer support for eating disorders in Canada: program user perspectives

2024· article· en· W4402276336 sur OpenAlex
Andrea LaMarre, Jennifer Couturier, Gina Dimitropoulos, Shaleen Jones, Sonia Kumar, Nicole Obeid, Lori Wozney

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.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueEating Disorders and Behaviors
Établissements canadiensIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Organismes subventionnairesPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
Mots-clésEating disordersPsychologyComputer scienceClinical psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Evidence for the value of peer support for eating disorders (EDs) is growing. Peer support is not a replacement for treatment, but can provide hope for recovery, enhance motivation for treatment, and increase feelings of connectedness and belonging for those experiencing EDs. In this study, we explored peer mentees’ experiences of peer support for EDs to better understand the impact of peer support and its role in the Canadian treatment and support continuum. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 people who had received peer support (group, one-on-one, or chat) and conducted a reflexive thematic analysis through a critical realist lens. We developed four themes. Participants described the importance of connecting with others who had “been there,” which helped generate a sense of belonging and connectedness. They also highlighted aspects of the peer support “container” that needed to be in place, such as guidelines for groups and agreements for one-on-one mentoring. When peer support was delivered well, participants described how it helped them help themselves through increasing motivation, communication skills, and other coping skills. Finally, participants described the unique role of peer support within the treatment continuum, as a modality that was accessible, free, and delivered in a way that focused on the whole person. Together, our findings illustrate the value of peer support and considerations for enabling effective and safe peer support delivery. Peer support can provide hope for recovery, help people feel more motivated to engage in treatment, and generate a sense of belonging for those experiencing EDs. In this study, we sought to understand how peer mentees experienced peer support for EDs. We also wanted to know what role(s) they thought peer support served within the Canadian treatment and support continuum. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 people who had received peer support (group, one-on-one, or chat). We developed four themes using a qualitative analysis approach called reflexive thematic analysis. Participants described the importance of connecting with others who had “been there.” This helped them feel less isolated and more connected to others with lived experience. They also described several things that needed to be in place for peer support to work, including guidelines for groups and agreements for one-on-one mentoring. If these things were in place, peer support could help people learn to help themselves; for instance, participants shared that they felt more motivated and developed stronger coping and communication skills. In terms of the role of peer support, participants shared that it was an accessible and free option, and one that made them feel seen as a whole person. Together, our findings illustrate the value of peer support and considerations for enabling effective and safe peer support delivery.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,490
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,333
Écart entre enseignants0,317 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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