PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Objective: Parent peer advocacy, mentoring, and support programs, delivered by parents with lived child protection (CP) experience to parents receiving CP intervention, are increasingly recognized internationally as inclusive practices that promote positive outcomes, but little is known about what shared characteristics exist across these types of programs and what variations may exist in service delivery or impact. This scoping review examines 25 years (1996-2021) of empirical literature on these programs to develop a systematic mapping of existing models and practices as context for program benefits and outcome achievement. Method: Studies were selected using a systematic search process. The final sample comprised 45 publications that addressed research on 24 CP-related parent peer advocacy and support programs. Data analysis explored how programs were studied and conceptualized and examined their impact on parents, professionals, and the CP system. Results: Substantial variation in program settings, target populations, aims, advocate roles, and underlying theoretical frameworks were identified. Across program settings, existing empirical evidence on impact and outcomes also varied, though positive impacts and outcomes were evident across most settings. Conclusions: Findings from this review highlight the need to account better for parent peer advocacy and support program variations in future practice development to ensure alignment with inclusive and participatory principles and goals. Future research is also needed to address current knowledge gaps and shed light on the impact of these differences on individual, case, and system outcomes.
摘要：
目标：家长同行倡导，指导,和支持计划，由具有生活儿童保护（CP）经验的父母提供给接受CP干预的父母，在国际上越来越被认为是促进积极成果的包容性做法，但是，对于这些类型的程序之间存在哪些共享特征以及服务交付或影响中可能存在哪些变化知之甚少。本范围审查审查了有关这些计划的25年（1996-2021年）的经验文献，以开发现有模型和实践的系统映射，作为计划收益和成果实现的背景。方法：使用系统搜索过程选择研究。最终样本包括45种出版物，涉及24种与CP相关的父母同伴倡导和支持计划的研究。数据分析探讨了如何对计划进行研究和概念化，并检查了其对父母的影响，专业人士,CP系统。结果：程序设置有很大差异，目标人群,目标,倡导角色,并确定了基本的理论框架。跨程序设置，关于影响和结果的现有经验证据也各不相同，尽管积极的影响和结果在大多数环境中都很明显。结论：本次审查的结果强调，需要在未来的实践发展中更好地考虑父母同行倡导和支持计划的变化，以确保与包容性和参与性原则和目标保持一致。未来的研究还需要解决当前的知识差距，并阐明这些差异对个体的影响，case,和系统结果。
