An exploration of the roles and experiences of SCI peer mentors using creative non-fiction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentors are individuals who, through their lived experiences, offer emotional support and empathetic understanding to others living with SCI to foster positive health, independence, and well-being. This study explored SCI peer mentors’ perceptions of their roles and experiences. Six paid or volunteer peer mentors participated in semi-structured interviews. We first explored the data using thematic narrative analysis to identify patterns, themes, and narrative types. Next, we analyzed the narrative types using creative analytical practices to construct and refine the stories. Based on our analysis, we developed two stories from a storyteller perspective to present a snapshot of SCI peer mentors’ experiences. The first story focuses on a “discovery” narrative from the point of view of Casey who adopted a person-centered approach to mentoring, focusing their attention on the needs of the mentee. The second story focuses on Taylor’s experiences with the “dark” side of peer mentorship, which focuses on the psychological toll of being a SCI peer mentor, from discussions about suicidal thoughts with clients to struggling with burnout. Results provided insights for support services regarding the importance of supporting the mental health of mentors to ensure they continue delivering high quality mentorship.Implications for rehabilitationPeer mentors need to be educated on the significance of their role in the rehabilitation process and how their interpersonal behaviours can influence their mentees, both positively and negatively.Peer mentors should receive formalized and accessible training to ensure they are equipped with effective mentoring skills, but also providing them with tools to cope with physical, mental, and emotional stressors they may encounter as mentors.There is a need to continue diversifying and improving the types of services provided to SCI peer mentors in addition to one-on-one counselling, such as interactive educational workshops, for peer mentors to learn and practice coping skills, including mindfulness, meditation, and action-planning.As with other paid employees, SCI peer mentors should be trained to recognize when they are feeling depleted and be supported in seeking appropriate care from a health professional to provide quality psychosocial services to others. Peer mentors need to be educated on the significance of their role in the rehabilitation process and how their interpersonal behaviours can influence their mentees, both positively and negatively. Peer mentors should receive formalized and accessible training to ensure they are equipped with effective mentoring skills, but also providing them with tools to cope with physical, mental, and emotional stressors they may encounter as mentors. There is a need to continue diversifying and improving the types of services provided to SCI peer mentors in addition to one-on-one counselling, such as interactive educational workshops, for peer mentors to learn and practice coping skills, including mindfulness, meditation, and action-planning. As with other paid employees, SCI peer mentors should be trained to recognize when they are feeling depleted and be supported in seeking appropriate care from a health professional to provide quality psychosocial services to others.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".