Deconstructing the delivery of peer mentorship for persons with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentorship typically involves interactions between two individuals where one (the mentor) provides support to the other (the mentee). Mentees associate a wide variety of positive physical, and psychosocial outcomes with this service. Interestingly, despite the known benefits of peer mentoring, little is known about the impact of certain delivery characteristics (i.e., interaction modality) on the quality of this service. Given how multifaceted this service is, understanding the impact that specific delivery characteristics have on the quality of peer mentorship is critical for ensuring that peer mentorship programs are providing the best possible service. This dissertation aimed to deconstruct the delivery of peer mentorship to determine what delivery characteristics are currently utilized in SCI peer mentorship research and community programming and examine the impact of interaction modality on leadership behaviours and counselling skills of peer mentors. First, a scoping review was conducted to provide a comprehensive synthesis of the research evidence regarding delivery characteristics of research-based peer mentorship interventions for people with SCI. Second, an environmental scan was conducted to support the scoping review by examining delivery characteristics of peer mentorship programs delivered by community organizations across Canada. Third, a qualitative study, informed by the tenets of transformational leadership theory (Bass & Riggio, 2006) was performed to examine leadership behaviours used by SCI peer mentors. Lastly, an experimental within-subjects design was used to study the effects of interaction modality on the leadership behaviours, motivational interviewing skills and behaviour change techniques used by SCI peer mentors. Overall, SCI peer mentorship is being delivered through a variety of modalities (e.g., telephone, video-chat) in both research and community-based programs. During SCI peer mentorship, mentors use a range of leadership behaviours and counselling skills, but the use of these behaviours/skills does not seem to differ between telephone and video-chat interactions. While Canadian peer mentorship programs can have confidence that similar quality mentorship is being provided through telephone and video chat modalities, further research is needed to examine the impact of other interaction modalities (e.g., face-to-face) and delivery characteristics (e.g., matching criteria) on the quality of SCI peer mentorship services.
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 | 0.023 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".