Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32381086›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2020

Provision of peer support at the intersection of homelessness and problem substance use services: a systematic 'state of the art' review.

Joanna Astrid Miler, Hannah Carver, Rebecca Foster, Tessa Parkes

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
17.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joanna Astrid MilerSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Colin Bell Building 4S31, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK. joanna.miler@stir.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6664-7104
Hannah CarverSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Colin Bell Building 4S31, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.
Rebecca FosterSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Colin Bell Building 4S31, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.
Tessa ParkesSalvation Army Centre for Addiction Services and Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Colin Bell Building 4S31, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.
University of Stirling · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeer support refers to a process whereby individuals with lived experience of a particular phenomenon provide support to others by explicitly drawing on their personal experience. It has been adopted in a variety of service contexts including homelessness, substance use, mental and physical health. Those who experience homelessness have some of the most complex intersecting health and social challenges. This 'state of the art' review provides a systematic search and synthesis of literature examining use of peer support models within services for people impacted by homelessness and problem substance use.

methodsA systematic search using six databases (CINAHL, SocINDEX, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Knowledge) was conducted in August 2019 and identified 2248 papers published in English after the year 2000. After de-duplication and scanning titles/abstracts, 61 papers were deemed relevant. Three more papers (including one grey literature report) were identified via references, but two papers were later excluded due to relevance. The final 62 papers included studies conducted in five countries. A thematic analysis approach was used to compare and contrast the study findings and provide a synthesis of the main learning points.

resultsIn recent years there has been a substantial increase in research examining the utility of peer support yet there is significant variation across this field. Alongside profiling the range of settings, aims, populations, and main outcomes of these studies, this paper also provides an overview of overarching themes: the overall effectiveness and impact of peer-staffed or peer-led interventions; and challenges commonly faced in these roles. Five themes relating to the challenges faced by peers were identified: vulnerability, authenticity, boundaries, stigma, and lack of recognition.

conclusionsWhile our findings provide support for current efforts to involve individuals with lived experience in providing peer support to those experiencing concurrent problem substance use and homelessness, they also urge caution because of common pitfalls that can leave those providing the support vulnerable. We conclude that peers should be respected, valued, supported, and compensated for their work which is often profoundly challenging. Suggested guidelines for the implementation of peer involvement in research studies and service delivery are presented.

Indexed as

Social SupportChronic DiseaseHealth Services AccessibilityHumansIll-Housed PersonsPeer GroupPeer InfluenceSocial ProblemsSubstance-Related DisordersUrban Health Services

Identifiers

PMID32381086
PMCPMC7203893
OpenAlexW3013598424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.