Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42477231›Full record

ArticleHealth & justice2026

Peer support for social care in prison: development of guidance and a logic model informed by mixed studies review and co-development workshops.

Deborah Buck, Adam O'Neill, Mark Sewell, Eybes Johnson, Noor Butt, Ryan Cowley-Sharp, Paula Harriott, Catherine Robinson, Louise Robinson, Katrina Forsyth

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health & justice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Deborah BuckUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. deborah.buck@manchester.ac.uk.
Adam O'NeillUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Mark SewellUnlock, Maidstone, United Kingdom.
Eybes JohnsonUnlock, Maidstone, United Kingdom.
Noor ButtUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Ryan Cowley-SharpLancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom.
Paula HarriottUnlock, Maidstone, United Kingdom.
Catherine RobinsonUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Louise RobinsonLancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom.
Katrina ForsythUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. katrina.forsyth@manchester.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prison peer support schemes can offer social care for people who require help with activities such as self-care, fetching meals, getting around safely, taking part in meaningful activities, and/or forming or maintaining relationships. Little is known about how best to deliver and monitor prison peer support schemes. Peer supporters do not always receive appropriate training or supervision, leaving them and the support recipient vulnerable to exploitation and/or distress or harm. We conducted a mixed studies review to co-develop guidance on peer support schemes for social care in prison and developed an initial programme theory and logic model. We synthesised findings/evidence from stakeholder workshops, six of our previous projects on social care in/on release from prison, and an umbrella review of the literature. The co-developed guidance provides structure for some aspects of the peer support process while allowing for flexibility. We make recommendations about recruitment, training, roles, support plans, and supervision of and support for peer supporters themselves. Better structured/formalised processes which espouse a peer-led approach would empower peer supporters to optimise their capacity to be the "eyes and ears on the ground" and to become recognised, respected and valued as integral to the running of the prison. In turn, this could provide individuals with a sense of purpose, self-efficacy, and self-confidence. The correct balance between risk-management and allowing some flexibility within the peer support role needs to be determined. Our guidance will be implemented and evaluated in at least one prison and disseminated across England and Wales.

Identifiers

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.