ArticleHealth & social care in the community2022
A participatory evaluation of legal support in the context of health-focused peer advocacy with people who are homeless in London, UK.
Article in Health & social care in the community, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A case study of partnership in practice: challenges and insights in the development of an academic-community coalition "The Migrant Health Community Research Network".Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- A participatory evaluation of legal support in the context of health-focused peer advocacy with people who are homeless in London, UK.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Legal problems can be cause and consequence of ill-health and homelessness, necessitating efforts to integrate responses to these challenges. How to respond to legal issues within the context of health services for people who are homeless is though unclear. Groundswell piloted providing legal support to peer advocates (who have current or past experience of homelessness) and clients currently homeless in addition to their health-focused work. A participatory action-research design evaluated the emerging programme. Groundswell staff, both researchers and those involved in service delivery, co-led the research alongside an external researcher. Qualitative methods were used to understand the experiences of legal support. We interviewed peer advocates and volunteers (n = 8), Groundswell clients (n = 3) and sector stakeholders (n = 3). Interviews were linked to regular reflective recorded meetings (n = 7) where Groundswell staff and researchers discussed the programme and the evaluation. Data were analysed thematically. The findings focus on three themes. First, peer advocates' and clients' legal needs involve an experience of being overwhelmed by system complexity. Second, the legal support to peer advocates aided in brokering and signposting to other legal support, in the context of a supportive organisational culture. Third, support to clients can be effective, although the complexity of legal need undermines potential for sustainable responses. In conclusion, legal support for peer advocates should be developed by Groundswell and considered by other similar agencies. Legal support to people who are currently street homeless requires significant resources and so health-focused third-sector organisations maybe unable to offer effective support. Other modes of integration should be pursued. Findings also have implications for how the third sector relates to the government agencies implicated in the legal challenges facing people who are homeless.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.