Becoming peer educators in workplace mental health: Qualitative exploration of challenges and opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peer-led workplace mental health training programs informed by the principles of contact-based education have shown promising results, but research evidence largely focuses on measuring outcomes for service recipients with little attention to the experiences of peer educators in delivering these interventions. OBJECTIVE: To gain in-depth knowledge about the opportunities and challenges experienced peer educators recruited to lead a mental health literacy training program for healthcare workers. METHODS: An interpretive description approach was used to explore the experiences of peer educators in providing a structured two-day "Beyond Silence" workplace mental health training program. Peer educators were healthcare workers with personal mental health experience, who completed an additional leadership training. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with seven peer educators. Data collection and analysis was concurrent and iterative, employing inductive analysis. RESULTS: Four overarching themes captured the key opportunities and challenges faced by peer educators: 1) the art and science of providing mental health literacy training, 2) power of personal stories, 3) competence as a journey or a destination and 4) the dual role of educator and advocate. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations are provided for recruitment, training, and support for peer educators. Future research could focus on longitudinal evaluation of engagement and sustainability of peer educators in this role.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".