MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118245219 · doi:10.2190/om.69.2.d

From Suicide Survivor to Peer Counselor: Breaking the Silence of Suicide Bereavement

2014· article· en· W2118245219 on OpenAlexaff
Olga Oulanova, Roy Moodley, Monique Séguin

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisDouglas Mental Health University InstituteInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilencePsychologyTransformative learningPsychotherapistSuicide preventionInterpretative phenomenological analysisPoison controlClinical psychologyMedicineQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sought to explore the phenomenon of peer counseling in suicide bereavement by addressing the question, what are the lived experiences of suicide survivors who become peer counselors? Participants were 15 individuals bereaved through suicide who had been volunteering with others bereaved in the same manner. This research employed the interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach to provide a detailed description of participants' journeys that went from experiencing the suicide of a loved one, to the decision to become a peer counselor, to, finally, providing support to other survivors. The findings suggest that participants understand the provision of peer counseling as a transformative process. Being a peer counselor means actively challenging the silence around suicide by speaking out about suicide-related issues and offering other survivors a safe space to share their stories. The broader implications of these findings for suicide postvention research and clinical practice are addressed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207