MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390534301 · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-17524-4

“Shared experience makes this all possible”: documenting the guiding principles of peer-led services for people released from prison

2024· article· en· W4390534301 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather Palis, Pam Young, Mo Korchinski, Shawn Wood, Jessica Xavier, Nelson Luk, Simrat Mahil, Sofia Bartlett, Helen Brown, Amy Salmon, Tonia L. Nicholls, Amanda Slaunwhite

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalBC Centre for Disease ControlBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchProvidence Health Care
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupPrisonMedicineQualitative researchMedical educationNursingPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of peer-led services in supporting community reintegration for people released from prison. This study aims to document the guiding principle of a peer-led service for people released from prison, from the perspective of peer mentors. METHODS: Data were collected using focus groups (N = 10; 2 groups with 5 participants each) and one-on-one interviews (N = 5) including a total of 13 people, representing all UTGSS staff at the time of the study. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify patterns in the data. Initial coding was done by using "in-vivo" codes (i.e. applying codes to terms used by participants). This informed the direction of the next stage of analysis, which focused on identifying categories that synthesized the codes and data across transcripts. In this stage, broad themes and sub-themes were developed. FINDINGS: Six themes were constructed to reflect the guiding principles of UTGSS staff. This includes four central themes: 1) Offering hope; 2) Building respectful relationships; 3) Providing consistent support; 4) Meeting people where they are at. Two connected themes are also reported: 1) Relying on shared experience, which participants reported serves as the foundation for practicing these guiding principles and 2) Bridging connections to services, which reflects the outcome of practicing these guiding principles. CONCLUSION: The principles identified in this study can be used by UTGSS staff as a guide for checking-in on progress with clients and may be considered as a model for reflection on practice by staff providing similar peer-led services. These principles should not be applied in a prescriptive way, as relationship building is at the centre of peer support, and different applications will be required depending on clients' goals and the range of supports available within their community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.031
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0060.018
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis→French-language works237,207→