Effects of a peer support programme for youth social services employees experiencing potentially traumatic events: a protocol for a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of peer support programmes to help workers experiencing potentially traumatic events (PTE) has increased in high-risk organisations in the last decades. However, the scientific evidence of its effectiveness is still very limited. This paper aims to describe the protocol of a prospective cohort study that assesses the efficacy of a peer support programme among youth social services employees exposed to a PTE at work on psychological well-being, work functioning and needs of support. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods prospective study that will examine workers' evolution four times over a 12-month period in Canada. This study involves: (1) quantitative data obtained through self-administrated questionnaires among 222 workers, and (2) qualitative in-depth interviews with a subsample of 45 workers. This study will compare findings from a cohort who received the support of a peer following a PTE (peer support-experimental protocol) as part of the experimental protocol of the Montreal Youth Social Services-University Institute (MYSS-UI), the second group of workers did not ask for the peer support (no peer support-experimental protocol) but was part of MYSS-UI, and the third group received standard organisational support from the Monteregie Youth Social Services (MYSS) (standard organisational protocol). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and informed consent form complied with the ethics guidelines of the MYSS-UI. The Research Ethics Board of MYSS-UI and MYSS reviewed and accepted the protocol as required. The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at research and general public conferences, disseminated via a public report for the institute that funded the project and for all workers. Results of this study will influence decision making regarding intervention policies following PTE and peer support interventions may be expanded throughout the youth social services in Canada and worldwide.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.092 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".