A COMMUNITY VISITING PILOT PROJECT EXPLORING THE BENEFITS OF ONE-TO-ONE PEER SUPPORT FOR STROKE SURVIVORS POST HOSPITAL DISCHARGE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With a united vision of creating in-home peer support for stroke survivors, VHA Home HealthCare, March of Dimes Canada and the Toronto Stoke Networks collaborated to pilot an in-home, community peer support program based on the Peers Fostering Hope Hospital Program. Traditionally, peer support programs are offered in hospital or as group support in the community. This pilot is believed to be the first known community support program for stroke survivors in Ontario, Canada where trained peer volunteers have one-to-one visits with recent stroke survivors in their home or community setting. Four peer volunteers assisted with program development and eleven were recruited to provide in-home support. Operational and administrative processes, unique to providing visits in the community, were developed. Of particular importance to peer volunteers was education on delivering in-home/community support. Upon hospital discharge, clients were offered the opportunity to participate in this pilot program. Nine matches occurred and visits ranged from 1 to more than 13 over several months. Matches were based on geographical proximity and mutually agreed upon criteria (e.g. age, gender). Weekly or bi-weekly visits were scheduled in the clientu2019s home or an agreed upon community setting. Interviews were conducted with clients and peers. Clients spoke positively of their experience, from the hope and emotional support they received and knowledge provided by peers. Peers self-reported immense satisfaction and feelings of self-worth. Clients and peers equally benefited from this pilot program. Next steps include exploring identified challenges and implementation on a broader scale given its success.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.024 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.024 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".