Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Concurrent Substance Abuse and Mental Health Disorders, Mental Health Division, Innlandet Hospital Trust, P.O. Box 104, N-2381, Brumunddal, Norway.
Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, P.O. Box 400, 2418, Elverum, Norway.
Harm Reduct J. 2019 Jun 24;16(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12954-019-0310-x.
Traditional research about substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is considered, among an increasing number of service users, to be disempowering and poorly reflective of their priorities. Thus, this methodological article sought to examine the experiences of a peer research group (PRG), whose four members were in long-term SUD recovery, and a principal investigator (PI), when collaborating on a study of SUD recovery. This article has also aspired to discern the influence of peer researcher participation on the research process. The purpose of the qualitative research project that formed the basis of this methodological study was to examine the reasons provided and strategies employed for abstaining from problematic substance use among persons with SUDs.
The project took place from 2015 to 2018, during which time individual interviews were conducted with 18 persons in recovery from SUDs. The PRG contributed to all parts of the project and worked alongside the PI in preparing the study, during early stages of data analysis, and while writing up the findings. In total, ten group discussions were held over the course of 3 years.
The study showed that the PRG offered important contributions with respect to developing the interview guide, preunderstanding among the PRG members, and discussing alternative forms of data collection. Key findings about how this collaborative research process was experienced relate to three matters: the group aspect of participation, the value of predictable routines and clear expectations, and the open sharing of private matters. The PI experienced the research process as having been enriched by alternative ways of asking questions and interpreting findings and as an interactive arena for reciprocal social and professional support.
When establishing a PRG while studying recovery processes, it can be advantageous to include several peer researchers with diverse lived experiences concerning substance use, treatment, and recovery. If possible, at least one peer researcher with formal training or qualitative research experience might be included. The PI should be trained in collaborating with peer researchers or should be part of a research environment in which it is possible to discuss methodological challenges with other researchers.
越来越多的服务使用者认为，传统的物质使用障碍（SUD）治疗研究是一种削弱能力的方法，并且无法反映他们的优先事项。因此，本文旨在研究一个同伴研究小组（PRG）的经验，该小组的四名成员长期患有 SUD 并正在康复中，以及一名主要研究员（PI）在合作进行 SUD 康复研究时的经验。本文还旨在探讨同伴研究人员参与对研究过程的影响。这项定性研究项目的目的是研究患有 SUD 的人避免使用问题物质的原因和策略。
该项目于 2015 年至 2018 年进行，在此期间，对 18 名患有 SUD 的康复人员进行了个人访谈。PRG 参与了该项目的所有部分，并与 PI 一起准备研究、在数据分析的早期阶段以及在撰写研究结果时共同开展工作。在 3 年的时间里，共进行了 10 次小组讨论。
研究表明，PRG 在开发访谈指南、PRG 成员之间的预先理解以及讨论替代数据收集形式方面做出了重要贡献。关于如何体验这种合作研究过程的关键发现涉及三个方面：参与的小组方面、可预测的例行程序和明确期望的价值，以及私人事务的公开分享。PI 认为，研究过程通过提出问题和解释研究结果的替代方法以及作为相互支持的社会和专业支持的互动场所而得到了丰富。
在研究康复过程时，建立 PRG 时可以考虑包括具有不同的物质使用、治疗和康复经验的多位同伴研究人员。如果可能的话，最好包括一位具有正式培训或定性研究经验的同伴研究人员。PI 应该接受与同伴研究人员合作的培训，或者应该在一个可能与其他研究人员讨论方法学挑战的研究环境中。
