MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7008255892

B-SURE (Bereavement Support Research): The Differential Experiences of Peer and Professional Support in Grief

2022· article· en· W7008255892 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPeer supportGriefSocial supportContext (archaeology)PerceptionGrounded theoryQualitative researchEmotional supportParticipant observationPeer review
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract\nThe project aimed to investigate the differential experiences of those who have received peer or professional support for grief and bereavement. Although much is known with regards to the perceived impacts of peer and professional support in general, there is little research surrounding these support types in the context of grief and bereavement, the potential for these support types to be complementary, and how the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted the experiences of those receiving these forms of support. The main goal of this project was to address a significant gap in the literature by investigating the following questions: 1) to explore bereaved individuals’ experiences with seeking and/or receiving peer and professional support for their grief, and whether these support types can be complementary, as well as 2) to examine bereaved individuals experiences with online peer or professional support services during the COVID-19 pandemic and afterwards (including its more recent resolution, etc.). The intention of this study was to explore the differential experiences associated with both types of support, but not to determine if one is better than or as good as the other. Grounded in social support theory and guided by a constructivist paradigm, this research implemented a qualitative research design involving semi-structured interviews with 25 participants located in Midwestern Ontario. In total, 10 participants received professional support, seven received peer support, and eight received both forms of support. Interview questions addressed subjects pertaining to participant experience with support provided virtually, participant perception of the training of their support provider, and participant perception of how their support may have contributed to their grief journey. The project was conducted in collaboration with a community partner (Bereaved Families of Ontario – Midwestern Region). Methods of analysis included a hybrid of both inductive and deductive thematic analysis approaches. Results indicated that in both peer and professional support, all participants in this research feel as though their supporter had been adequately trained to provide grief support, except for some facilitators in peer support not holding space for the participants to speak. Additionally, participants highlighted that both support services were able to provide informational support, a reduction of feelings of isolation, and an increased sense of connection and normalization of their grief experience. Participants also expressed that the one-to-one format and the use of specialized therapeutic techniques were helpful components of professional support. Further, participants explained that in peer support, a helpful component of this support type was the shared lived experiences among those attending the peer group. Participants also highlighted many advantages and disadvantages of virtual support, such as the advantage of ability to receive support at home and the disadvantage of the lack of an in-person environment to foster additional bonding experiences with other participants in peer support. Overall, these findings suggest that peer and professional support within the context of grief are complementary support services and the way in which these services can be utilized together should be further explored. As many participants highlighted the challenges they experienced in finding grief support, the hope is that the bereaved community can utilize the results of this research to learn about the grief support options that are available and assist them in making an informed decision with regards to what type of support may be most beneficial to them.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,036

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,005
Communication savante0,0040,002
Science ouverte0,0010,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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 Opus0,047
Tête enseignante GPT0,337
Écart entre enseignants0,290 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Même sujetGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health→Travaux en français237 207→