Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32542342›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2020

Standardization and adaptability for dissemination of telephone peer support for high-risk groups: general evaluation and lessons learned.

Megan Evans, Patrick Y Tang, Nivedita Bhushan, Edwin B Fisher, Dawn Dreyer Valovcin, Cherie Castellano

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Megan EvansPeers for Progress and Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Patrick Y TangPeers for Progress and Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Nivedita BhushanPeers for Progress and Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Edwin B FisherPeers for Progress and Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Dawn Dreyer ValovcinRutgers University Behavioral Health Care National Call Center for Peer Support, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Cherie CastellanoRutgers University Behavioral Health Care National Call Center for Peer Support, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

Research BaseP30DK092926 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MARY ELLEN MICHELE HEISLER, ADESUWA B OLOMU · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092926
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond demonstrated effectiveness, research needs to identify how peer support can be implemented in real-world settings. Telephone peer support offers one approach to this. The purpose of this study is to evaluate telephone peer support provided by trained peer staff for high-risk groups, implemented according to key tasks or functions of the Reciprocal Peer Support model (RPS) providing both standardization and adaptability. The methods used in the study include the review of contact data for years 2015-2016 from telephone peer support services of Rutgers Health University Behavioral Health Care, serving veterans, police, mothers of children with special needs, and child protection workers; structured interviews with peer supporters and clients; and audit of case notes. Across 2015-2016, peer supporters made 64,786 contacts with a total of 5,616 callers. Adaptability was apparent in 22% of callers' relationships lasting ≤1 month and 43% ≥1 year, voicemails valued as communicating presence, 92% of callers receiving support with psychosocial issues, 65% with concrete problems, such as medical or other services, 88% receiving social support, and 88% either resolving an issue (e.g., finding employment) or making documented progress (e.g., getting professional treatment, insurance, or children's services). With the balance of standardization and adaptability provided by the RPS, telephone peer support can address diverse needs and provide diverse contact patterns, assistance, support, and benefits.

Indexed as

CounselingTelephoneChildFemaleHumansMothersReference StandardsSocial SupportHigh riskMental healthPeer supportStandardizationStressTelephone

Identifiers

PMID32542342
PMCPMC7529008
OpenAlexW3034776885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.