“Understanding the journey from A to Z”: centering peer support perspectives to unveil the mechanisms and power of peer support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to gain insights from peer support workers (PSWs) on the unseen mechanisms of peer support work that may be applied to implementing a child and youth mental health peer support program in a children’s hospital emergency department (ED). Design/methodology/approach This study used a critical realist perspective with a qualitative research design. Eight participants, all PSWs in health, community and social services working with adults, adolescents and children, were recruited from Alberta, Canada. Data were collected through in-person semi-structured interviews and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis. Findings The results generated interrelated patterns of meaning among PSWs that were grouped into three main themes: inside out and outside in, no one leaves empty-handed and sculpting health system softness. Research limitations/implications All participants were trained by the same organization and may have similar understandings and approaches to the peer support role. Participants were predominantly of a similar demographic; thus, participants with minoritized identities may have challenges not represented. Practical implications Using nontraditional staffing models in an acute center may facilitate a shift to meet the chronic and complex issues of the 21st century. Social implications Youth peer support roles may reduce stigma by challenging stereotypes and myths, reduce social isolation and improve meaning, connection and belonging for individuals with mental illness who are often dislocated and disconnected from society. Originality/value This study exemplified the positive impacts peer support could make by improving child, youth and family experiences; reducing stigma; providing hope and help; and embedding the recovery model directly into the ED.
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 | 0.026 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.076 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".