Research Briefs
Peers for Progress recently kicked off a new service - A weekly email sent to you with highlights of papers addressing peer support and closely related material. Here features several articles from the weekly briefs and other sources.
A Qualitative Analysis of Motives for Lay Person Involvement in Health Promotion
Fienieg et al collect qualitative data from 24 lay persons across six sites in the Netherlands to identify factors that motivate them to assume an active role in the health of their communities. Their analysis reveals four key motivational themes. (Health Promot Int, Sept, 2011) [Full abstract]
Potential Uses of Online Social Networks in Peer Support
O’Dea uses a cross-sectional survey of 74 students to assess the applicability of online social networks to peer support services for mental health. Results indicate that online social networks are a viable platform for peer support, with 82% of participants indicating use of social networking sites and 47% expressing a belief that these sites could be used to address mental health issues. (Stud Health Technol Inform, 2011) [Full abstract]
Survey Identifies Common Features and Calls for CHWs as “Health Profession”
A survey of Community Health Workers by Ingram et al identifies common features in their training and activities, e.g., tending to serve communities from which they come, frequent focus on chronic disease and, prevention and access to care. Paper calls for CHWs to be considered “a health profession rather than an intervention.” (J Community Health, October, 2011) [Full abstract]
Peer Support among Mothers After the Death of a Child
In their longitudinal qualitative study of an Internet based peer support for mothers with recently deceased children, Aho et al discovered that participants both gave and received emotional, cognitive, and community support (Scand J Caring Sci, October, 2011). [Full abstract]
Qualitative Study of Use of High- and Low-Tech Intervention Technologies by Promotoras
Arvey et al use observational and qualitative data to analyze technology use among Promotoras to promote colorectal screenings. Specifically, they differentiate between high-tech (i.e. computer based) and low-tech (i.e. flip charts and videos) approaches and the challenges posed by each method. (Health Educ Behav, October, 2011) [Full abstract]
More articles can be found at Science of Peer Support
Back to Top |