Abstract
Purpose
This study aimed to: (1) develop a coding manual to characterize topics discussed and conversation techniques used during peer mentorship conversations between people with spinal cord injury (SCI); (2) assess the reliability of the manual; and (3) apply the manual to characterize conversations.
Materials/Methods
The study was conducted in partnership with three Canadian provincial SCI organizations. Twenty-five phone conversations between SCI peer mentors and mentees were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Ten transcripts were inductively analyzed to develop a coding manual identifying topics and techniques used during the conversations. Inductive technique codes were combined and deductively linked to motivational interviewing and behaviour change techniques. Two coders independently applied the coding manual to all transcripts. Code frequencies were calculated.
Results
The coding manual included 14 topics and 31 techniques. The most frequently coded topics were personal information, recreational programs, and chronic health services for mentors and mentees. The most frequently coded techniques were giving personal information, social smoothers, and closed question for mentors; and giving personal information, social smoothers, and sharing perspective for mentees.
Conclusion
This research provides insights into topics and techniques used during real-world peer mentorship conversations. Findings may be valuable for understanding and improving SCI peer mentorship programs.
SCI peer mentorship conversations address a wide range of rehabilitation topics ranging from acute care to living in the community.
Identification of the topics discussed, and techniques used in SCI peer mentorship conversations can help to inform formalized efforts to train and educate acute and community-based rehabilitation professionals.
Identifying commonly discussed topics in SCI peer mentorship conversation may help to ensure that peer mentors are equipped with the necessary knowledge and resources, or the development of those resources be prioritized.
Developing a method to characterize the topics discussed and techniques used during SCI peer mentorship conversations may aid in designing methods to evaluate how rehabilitation professionals provide support to people with SCI.
Implications for Rehabilitation
Data deposition
The dataset generated and analyzed during the current study are available on Open Science Framework (see osf.io/qszr9).
Ethical approval
We certify that all applicable institutional and governmental regulations concerning the ethical participation of human volunteers were followed during the course of this research. All methods were approved by the University of British Columbia Research Ethics Board.
Author contributions
HG, SS, SC, TC, and CB contributed to the conceptualization of this research and funding acquisition. HG, SS, SC, TC, CM, and RM contributed to the development of the methodology. RM, EG, and KB contributed to data collection. RM, EG, KB, and HG contributed to data analysis. All authors contributed to the interpretation of the research findings. RM was responsible for writing the original manuscript draft. All authors contributed to reviewing and approved the final draft. HG provided supervision throughout all research activities.
Disclosure statement
The authors do not have competing financial interests in relation to the work.