Le rôle des pairs chercheurs dans la recherche sur la consommation sexualisée de substances : avantages et défis.
IF 0.3 4区 医学Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTHSante PubliquePub Date : 2024-01-01
Jorge Flores-Aranda, Jean-Sébastien Rousseau, Frankie B Lambert, Yannick Gaudette, Ida Giugnatico, Alexandre Brulotte, Joseph De Piano, Rossio Motta-Ochoa
{"title":"Le rôle des pairs chercheurs dans la recherche sur la consommation sexualisée de substances : avantages et défis.","authors":"Jorge Flores-Aranda, Jean-Sébastien Rousseau, Frankie B Lambert, Yannick Gaudette, Ida Giugnatico, Alexandre Brulotte, Joseph De Piano, Rossio Motta-Ochoa","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Sexual and gender diverse individuals (SGDI) report higher usage of methamphetamine in sexual contexts. They face difficulties making sense of their experiences and being heard in services. Peer researchers (individuals with lived experience) were involved in a participatory study on methamphetamine consumption.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>1) To describe the opportunities and challenges of involving peer researchers in all stages of the research process; 2) To discuss how this involvement could address the epistemic injustice experienced by SGDI who practice chemsex.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>The peer-researcher participatory process was documented through a journal and meeting notes, which were analyzed through the framework of epistemic injustice. This notion refers to the mechanisms that prevent the knowledge of a person or group from being heard and considered legitimate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The contribution of peer researchers was highly valued and raised questions. Their in-depth knowledge facilitated data analysis and guided knowledge dissemination, promoting the transformation of current services. Their presence also helped to establish relationships of trust with the study population.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This connection with the study population can create expectations for services that may require a significant level of involvement from researchers. The team’s commitment to improving services can generate a mistaken perception of a lack of objectivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":49575,"journal":{"name":"Sante Publique","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sante Publique","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Context: Sexual and gender diverse individuals (SGDI) report higher usage of methamphetamine in sexual contexts. They face difficulties making sense of their experiences and being heard in services. Peer researchers (individuals with lived experience) were involved in a participatory study on methamphetamine consumption.
Objectives: 1) To describe the opportunities and challenges of involving peer researchers in all stages of the research process; 2) To discuss how this involvement could address the epistemic injustice experienced by SGDI who practice chemsex.
Methodology: The peer-researcher participatory process was documented through a journal and meeting notes, which were analyzed through the framework of epistemic injustice. This notion refers to the mechanisms that prevent the knowledge of a person or group from being heard and considered legitimate.
Results: The contribution of peer researchers was highly valued and raised questions. Their in-depth knowledge facilitated data analysis and guided knowledge dissemination, promoting the transformation of current services. Their presence also helped to establish relationships of trust with the study population.
Discussion: This connection with the study population can create expectations for services that may require a significant level of involvement from researchers. The team’s commitment to improving services can generate a mistaken perception of a lack of objectivity.
期刊介绍:
La revue Santé Publique s’adresse à l’ensemble des acteurs de santé publique qu’ils soient décideurs,
professionnels de santé, acteurs de terrain, chercheurs, enseignants ou formateurs, etc. Elle publie
des travaux de recherche, des évaluations, des analyses d’action, des réflexions sur des interventions
de santé, des opinions, relevant des champs de la santé publique et de l’analyse des services de
soins, des sciences sociales et de l’action sociale.
Santé publique est une revue à comité de lecture, multidisciplinaire et généraliste, qui publie sur
l’ensemble des thèmes de la santé publique parmi lesquels : accès et recours aux soins, déterminants
et inégalités sociales de santé, prévention, éducation pour la santé, promotion de la santé,
organisation des soins, environnement, formation des professionnels de santé, nutrition, politiques
de santé, pratiques professionnelles, qualité des soins, gestion des risques sanitaires, représentation
et santé perçue, santé scolaire, santé et travail, systèmes de santé, systèmes d’information, veille
sanitaire, déterminants de la consommation de soins, organisation et économie des différents
secteurs de production de soins (hôpital, médicament, etc.), évaluation médico-économique
d’activités de soins ou de prévention et de programmes de santé, planification des ressources,
politiques de régulation et de financement, etc