↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative synthesis of the positive and negative impacts related to delivery of peer-based health interventions in prison settings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
A qualitative synthesis of the positive and negative impacts related to delivery of peer-based health interventions in prison settings
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1753-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane South, James Woodall, Karina Kinsella, Anne-Marie Bagnall

Abstract

Peer interventions involving prisoners in delivering peer education and peer support in a prison setting can address health need and add capacity for health services operating in this setting. This paper reports on a qualitative synthesis conducted as part of a systematic review of prison-based peer interventions. One of the review questions aimed to investigate the positive and negative impacts of delivering peer interventions within prison settings. This covered organisational and process issues relating to peer interventions, including prisoner and staff views. A qualitative synthesis of qualitative and mixed method studies was undertaken. The overall study design comprised a systematic review involving searching, study selection, data extraction and validity assessment. Studies reporting interventions with prisoners or ex-prisoners delivering education or support to prisoners resident in any type of prison or young offender institution, all ages, male and female, were included. A thematic synthesis was undertaken with a subset of studies reporting qualitative data (n = 33). This involved free coding of text reporting qualitative findings to develop a set of codes, which were then grouped into thematic categories and mapped back to the review question. Themes on process issues and wider impacts were grouped into four thematic categories: peer recruitment training and support; organisational support; prisoner relationships; prison life. There was consistent qualitative evidence on the need for organisational support within the prison to ensure smooth implementation and on managing security risks when prisoners were involved in service delivery. A suite of factors affecting the delivery of peer interventions and the wider organisation of prison life were identified. Alongside reported benefits of peer delivery, some reasons for non-utilisation of services by other prisoners were found. There was weak qualitative evidence on wider impacts on the prison system, including better communication between staff and prisoners. Gaps in evidence were identified. The quality of included studies limited the strength of the conclusions. The main conclusion is that peer interventions cannot be seen as independent of prison life and health services need to work in partnership with prison services to deliver peer interventions. More research is needed on long-term impacts. PROSPERO ref: CRD42012002349 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Professor 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 31 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 15%
Psychology 11 13%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 33 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,301,727
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,976
of 7,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,566
of 325,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#42
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.