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, Sheila Casemore, Lubna Aslam, Teren Clarke, Kathleen A Martin Ginis
{"title":"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.","authors":"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, Sheila Casemore, Lubna Aslam, Teren Clarke, Kathleen A Martin Ginis","doi":"10.1038/s41393-024-01033-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Guided 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.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The 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.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Peer support programs for people with SCI delivered by community-based SCI organizations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Through 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":21976,"journal":{"name":"Spinal cord","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spinal cord","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-024-01033-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study design: Guided 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.
Objectives: The 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.
Setting: Peer support programs for people with SCI delivered by community-based SCI organizations.
Methods: This 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.
Results: In 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.
Conclusion: Through 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.
期刊介绍：
Spinal Cord is a specialised, international journal that has been publishing spinal cord related manuscripts since 1963. It appears monthly, online and in print, and accepts contributions on spinal cord anatomy, physiology, management of injury and disease, and the quality of life and life circumstances of people with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord is multi-disciplinary and publishes contributions across the entire spectrum of research ranging from basic science to applied clinical research. It focuses on high quality original research, systematic reviews and narrative reviews.
Spinal Cord''s sister journal Spinal Cord Series and Cases: Clinical Management in Spinal Cord Disorders publishes high quality case reports, small case series, pilot and retrospective studies perspectives, Pulse survey articles, Point-couterpoint articles, correspondences and book reviews. It specialises in material that addresses all aspects of life for persons with spinal cord injuries or disorders. For more information, please see the aims and scope of Spinal Cord Series and Cases.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
