• The SCI Peer Support Evaluation Tool comprises of single-item measures for 20 SCI peer support outcomes.Ìý
• Community organizations can customize their evaluation by selecting the outcomes that are most relevant to their peer support programs and services.Ìý

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.

Project lead and contact information: Shane N. Sweet, 514-398-4184 x09903, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca, or

Citation:ÌýSweet, S. N., Shi, Z., Pastore, O., Shaw, R., Comeau, J., Gainforth H. L., McBride, C. B., Noonan, V. K., Scott, L., Flaro, H., Casemore, S., Aslam, L.b, Clarke, R., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2024). 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. Spinal Cord.

• Participation in a mentoring program showed a positive effect on coping strategies and desire to fight for things.
• Peer mentorship programs could serve as a means for promoting positive coping strategies for adults with SCI.

Objectives: Determine whether participating in peer mentorship is related to differences in reported use of coping strategies (acceptance of injury and fighting spirit) for adults with spinal cord injury.

Setting: Quebec, Canada.

Methods: A static group comparison design was used to retrospectively compare mentees (n = 68) and non-mentees (n = 63) on their reported coping strategies. Moderation analyses examined differences on coping strategies, while controlling for years since injury (significant covariate).

Results: A significant interaction was found between years since injury and peer mentorship for acceptance of injury and fighting spirit, where mentees living with their injury for longer (~30 years) reported more use of the acceptance of injury and fighting spirit coping strategies.

Conclusion: Peer mentorship programs could serve as a means for promoting positive coping strategies for adults with SCI. To better understand the role of peer mentorship, follow-up studies using more rigorous research methodologies such as cohort or randomized controlled trial study designs should be conducted.

Project lead and contact information: Meredith A Rocchi, meredith.rocchi [at] uottawa.ca

Citation: Rocchi, M., Zeleya, W., & Sweet, S. N. (2018). Peer mentorship for adults with spinal cord injury: a static group comparison between mentees and non-mentees' reported coping strategies. Spinal Cord, 56, 1102-1109.

• Having your peer support needs met is important to for social participation and life satisfaction.
• Rehabilitation professionals promoting participation in a mentoring program can bring benefits to participants.

Purpose: To test the hypothesis among people with spinal cord injury (SCI) that greater fulfillment of peer support needs to be associated with greater participation and life satisfaction. A secondary objective was to identify characteristics of people in great need of SCI peer support.

Method: The participants consisted of a population-based sample of 1549 adults with SCI. The participants completed a survey with questions on peer support, participation, life satisfaction and provided demographic and SCI-related information. A secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data was conducted. A set of regression analyses tested the primary purpose and a partition analysis was conducted to examine the secondary objective.

Results: In regression analyses, peer support need fulfillment was positively associated with autonomous-outdoors participation (p < 0.05), health participation (p < 0.05), and work/education participation (p < 0.05), as well as life satisfaction (p < 0.001) after controlling demographic and SCI-related variables. However, peer support need fulfillment was not related with overall participation or other subdomains of participation: autonomy indoors, social relationships and family role. The number of unmet SCI-related needs, injury characteristics and education were associated with fulfillment of SCI peer support needs.

Conclusions: The results provide some evidence that SCI peer support plays an important role in promoting participation and life satisfaction. Individuals with many SCI-related unmet needs are most likely to report a need for peer support.

Project lead and contact information: Shane Sweet, PhD, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca

Citation: Sweet, S. N., Noreau, L., Leblond, J., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2016). Peer support need fulfillment among adults with spinal cord injury: relationships with participation, life satisfaction and individual characteristics. Disability and Rehabilitation, 38(6), 558-565.

• Sensing a connection with your mentor helps the relationship become stronger.
• Providing training to mentors on improving the focus on mentees through empathy while promoting autonomy and decision making helps mentees develop skills required.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to understand the peer mentorship experiences of adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) through a self-determination theory (SDT) lens.

Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 13 adults with SCI (i.e., mentees) who received mentorship from fellow adults with SCI (i.e., mentors) as part of an existing provincial peer mentorship program. There were two analyses conducted in this study. The first was deductive, which involved organizing relevant data as per the three basic psychological needs of self-determination theory (i.e., autonomy, competence, and relatedness).

Results: Concerning autonomy, mentees expressed they were able to make their own decisions and their mentors’ personalized their sessions. Specific to relatedness, the mentees discussed that their mentors cared and empathized with them, which helped them connect with their mentor. In terms of competence, mentees explained that their mentors provided verbal encouragement and helped them realize they were capable of successfully completing tasks. Some mentees also highlighted how the mentors did not listen to their needs, indicating need thwarting behaviours. The second analysis was inductive and focused on the participants’ descriptions of their experiences. Mentees expressed the importance of their SCI community organization, the impact of mentoring on their families, and the positive outcomes they associated with peer mentorship, such as participation in daily and social activities.

Conclusion: Taken together, the present findings extend our understanding of SCI peer mentorship from the perspective of the mentee and particularly from an SDT angle.

Ìý

Project lead and contact information: Shane N. Sweet, 514-398-4184 x09903, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca,

Citation: Chemtob, K., Caron, J. G., Fortier, M. S., Latimer-Cheung, A. E., Zelaya, W., & Sweet, S. N. (2018). Exploring the peer mentorship experiences of adults with spinal cord injury. Rehabilitation Psychology, 63(4), 542

• Results identified the effects of peer mentorship on both peer mentors and mentees of community-based programs.
• These results will guide a team in developing a community-friendly peer mentorship evaluation tool, designed to evaluate the impacts of SCI peer mentorship programs.

Study design: A generic qualitative design.

Objectives: To obtain a deeper understanding of the outcomes of spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentorship programs delivered by community-based organizations. Setting: Peer mentorship programs of community-based SCI organizations

Methods: We interviewed 36 individuals who shared their experiences of SCI peer mentorship from the perspective of a peer mentee, peer mentor, or family member of a peer mentee/mentor, or staff of SCI community-based organizations. Interview data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

Results: Four overarching themes with sub-themes were identified. (1) Positive outcomes for mentees such as understanding, emotional outlet/psychological support, inspiration/hope, and belonging. (2) Positive outcomes for mentors such as gaining gratitude, confidence, pride, and personal growth. (3) Reciprocity in positive/negative outcomes for mentors and mentees, such as shared learning and a lack of connection. (4) Negative outcomes for mentors such as impact of negativity, emotional toll, and time/energy demands.

Conclusions: Peer mentorship programs delivered by community-based SCI organizations are important, impactful resources for individuals with SCI who engage in these programs. These results provide insights into the variety of positive and negative outcomes linked with these programs.

Project lead and contact information: Shane N. Sweet, 514-398-4184 1x09903, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca, @ShaneNSweet (Twitter), or

Citation: Sweet, S.N., Hennig, L., Shi, Z., Clarke, T., Flaro, H., Hawley, S., Schaefer, L., Gainforth, H.L. (2021) Outcomes of peer mentorship for people living with spinal cord injury: perspectives from members of Canadian community-based SCI organizations. Spinal Cord, 59, 1301-1308. doi: 10.1038/s41393-021-00725-2.

• The advantages of having a mentor appears to have impact among people who have a higher number of years since injury.
• Having a peer mentor has advantages, particularly when mentors focus on fostering relatedness and competency.

Objective: To investigate the role of spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentorship on quality of life (QoL)/participation, and test a self-determination theory model that explains the role of SCI peer mentorship on these outcomes.

Design: A static group comparison design.

Setting: Community.

Participants: A convenience sample of mentees (n= 68) and non-mentees (n= 63) who had an SCI, were older than 18 years, and spoke either English or French.

Interventions: Mentees: at least 4 peer mentorship sessions over the past 5 years; nonpeer mentees: 0 or 1 brief introductory session.

Main Outcome Measures: QoL (ie, life satisfaction and positive and negative affect), participation (eg, autonomous indoor; family role), and the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

Results: No group differences were found, but years since injury was a moderator indicating that, generally, peer mentees living with SCI for longer (~30y) appear to benefit more from peer mentorship interactions compared with non-mentees and mentees living with SCI for approximately 6 years. Competence and relatedness mediated the peer mentorship outcome relationship for QoL and some participation variables, indicating that peer mentorship predicted competence and relatedness, which in turn were related to the outcomes.

Conclusions: Satisfaction of competence and relatedness needs requires greater attention in SCI peer mentorship. Years since injury modified the relationship between peer mentorship and outcomes, which provided new insights on the role of SCI peer mentorship. Further studies are needed to determine SCI peer mentorship-specific outcomes that are important across the years-since-injury spectrum.

Project lead and contact information: Shane N. Sweet, 514-398-4184 x09903, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca, @ShaneNSweet(Twitter), or

Citation: Sweet, S.N., Michalovic, E., Latimer-Cheung, A.E., Fortier, M., Noreau, L., Zelaya, W., Martin Ginis, K.A. (2018). Spinal cord injury peer mentorship: Applying self-determination theory to explain quality of life and participation outcomes. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 99, 468-476. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.08.487

• Data will be helpful to inform the creation of an evaluation tool for existing SCI peer mentorship programs.

Objectives: Peer mentorship programs delivered by community-based spinal cord injury (SCI) organizations are multi-faceted and target numerous outcomes. Through previous studies, our community-university partnership team has identified 87 outcomes related to SCI peer mentorship. The purpose of this study was to reach agreement on which outcomes were the most important for SCI peer mentorship programs delivered by community-based organizations among individuals involved in these programs

Methods: We designed two sequential Delphi consensus studies. In Study 1, peer mentors, mentees, organizational staff at one of five SCI community-based organizations that partnered with our research team participated. Participants rated the importance of each of the 87 outcomes across three rounds. In Study 2, executive directors/CEOs and frontline peer mentorship staff members of ten community SCI organizations that have a peer mentorship program participated. Participants rated the importance to measure each of the outcomes drawn from Study 1.

Results: For Study 1, 50% of participants were primarily identified as mentors, 30% as mentees, and 20% as organizational staff within each round. After Round 1, 73 outcomes were retained based on the consensus criteria. In Round 2, 60 outcomes were kept. After Round 3, 25 outcomes were rated as very important for SCI peer mentorship. For Study 2, four executive directors/CEOs and 15 frontline peer mentorship staff members responded to the questionnaire in Round 1, four of the 25 outcomes were removed based on the consensus criteria. In Round 2, all outcomes met the consensus criteria and were therefore retained. Examples of outcomes included independence, confidence, and dignity.

Conclusions: Individuals involved in SCI peer mentorship deemed 21 outcomes as the most important for evaluating SCI peer mentorship programs delivered by community-based organizations. The 21 outcomes will inform the co-development of a SCI peer mentorship evaluation tool by this community-university partnership.

Project lead and contact information: Shane N. Sweet, 514-398-4184 x09903, shane.sweet [at] mcgill.ca, @ShaneNSweet(Twitter), or

Citation: Shi, Z., Michalovic, E., McKay, R., Gainforth, H. L., McBride, C. B., Clarke, T., Casemore, S., Sweet, S. N. (2023). Outcomes of spinal cord injury peer mentorship: A community-based Delphi consensus approach. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 66, 101678. Doi: .