Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39313564›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2024

The spinal cord injury (SCI) peer support evaluation tool: the development of a tool to assess outcomes of peer support programs within SCI community-based organizations.

Shane N Sweet, Zhiyang Shi, Olivia Pastore, Robert B Shaw, Jacques Comeau, Heather L Gainforth, Christopher B McBride, Vanessa K Noonan, Launel Scott, Haley Flaro and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

14 authors.

Shane N SweetDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. shane.sweet@mcgill.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-6172-3769
Zhiyang ShiDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4454-8495
Olivia PastoreDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0785-7181
Robert B ShawDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jacques ComeauDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Heather L GainforthSchool of Health & Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3281-1110
Christopher B McBrideSpinal Cord Injury BC, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Vanessa K NoonanPraxis Spinal Cord Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3226-9218
Launel ScottSpinal Cord Injury Saskatchewan Inc., Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Haley FlaroAbility New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada.
Sheila CasemoreSpinal Cord Injury Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lubna AslamSpinal Cord Injury Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Teren ClarkeSpinal Cord Injury Alberta, Calgary AB, Canada.
Kathleen A Martin GinisSchool of Health & Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7076-3594

Funding

Canada Research Chairs (Chaires de recherche du Canada) 950-232143Gouvernement du Canada | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada) 890-2016-0033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designGuided by the 4-step process outlined in the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline, multiple methodologies were used: Delphi, literature reviews, ratings with consensus, think-aloud, and test-retest.

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to develop and test a spinal cord injury (SCI) peer support evaluation tool that meets the needs of community-based SCI organizations in Canada.

settingPeer support programs for people with SCI delivered by community-based SCI organizations.

methodsThis research was co-constructed with executives and staff from SCI community-based organizations, people with SCI, researchers, and students. Given the multiple steps of this study, sample size and characteristics varied based on each step. Participants included people with SCI who received peer support (mentees) or provided peer support (mentors/supporters) and staff of community-based organizations.

resultsIn step 1, the 20 most important outcomes for SCI peer support were identified. In step 2 and 3, the 97 items were identified to assess the outcomes and by using rating and multiple consensus methodologies 20 items, one to assess each outcome, were selected. In step 4, content and face validity and test-retest reliability were achieved. The resulting SCI Peer Support Evaluation Tool consists of 20 single-item questions to assess 20 outcomes of SCI peer support.

conclusionThrough a systematic process, the SCI Peer Support Evaluation Tool is now ready to be implemented to assess outcomes of SCI peer support programs delivered by community-based SCI organizations.

Indexed as

Peer GroupSpinal Cord InjuriesAdultCanadaConsensusDelphi TechniqueFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareProgram EvaluationReproducibility of ResultsSocial Support

Identifiers

PMID39313564
PMCPMC11621013

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.