Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol

Introduction People who are homeless experience higher morbidity and mortality than the general population. These outcomes are exacerbated by inequitable access to healthcare. Emerging evidence suggests a role for peer advocates—that is, trained volunteers with lived experience—to support people who...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alec Miners, Dee Menezes, Serena Luchenski, Alistair Story, Lucy Platt, Elizabeth Williamson, Sujit D Rathod, Andrew Guise, PJ Annand, Paniz Hosseini, Kate Bowgett, Martin Burrows
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2021-06-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e050717.full
id doaj-636d679922e04821bfdffda48669b87f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-636d679922e04821bfdffda48669b87f2021-08-07T17:02:01ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552021-06-0111610.1136/bmjopen-2021-050717Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocolAlec Miners0Dee Menezes1Serena Luchenski2Alistair Story3Lucy Platt4Elizabeth Williamson5Sujit D Rathod6Andrew Guise7PJ Annand8Paniz Hosseini9Kate Bowgett10Martin Burrows112London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UKInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK1 Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, University College London, London, UK Find and Treat Service, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UKFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UKprofessor of biostatistics and health data science1 Department of Population Health at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK School of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UKSchool of Population Health and Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UKDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, Department of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UKGroundswell, London, UKGroundswell, London, UKIntroduction People who are homeless experience higher morbidity and mortality than the general population. These outcomes are exacerbated by inequitable access to healthcare. Emerging evidence suggests a role for peer advocates—that is, trained volunteers with lived experience—to support people who are homeless to access healthcare.Methods and analysis We plan to conduct a mixed methods evaluation to assess the effects (qualitative, cohort and economic studies); processes and contexts (qualitative study); fidelity; and acceptability and reach (process study) of Peer Advocacy on people who are homeless and on peers themselves in London, UK. People with lived experience of homelessness are partners in the design, execution, analysis and dissemination of the evaluation.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for all study designs has been granted by the National Health Service London—Dulwich Research Ethics Committee (UK) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine’s Ethics Committee (UK). We plan to disseminate study progress and outputs via a website, conference presentations, community meetings and peer-reviewed journal articles.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e050717.full
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alec Miners
Dee Menezes
Serena Luchenski
Alistair Story
Lucy Platt
Elizabeth Williamson
Sujit D Rathod
Andrew Guise
PJ Annand
Paniz Hosseini
Kate Bowgett
Martin Burrows
spellingShingle Alec Miners
Dee Menezes
Serena Luchenski
Alistair Story
Lucy Platt
Elizabeth Williamson
Sujit D Rathod
Andrew Guise
PJ Annand
Paniz Hosseini
Kate Bowgett
Martin Burrows
Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
BMJ Open
author_facet Alec Miners
Dee Menezes
Serena Luchenski
Alistair Story
Lucy Platt
Elizabeth Williamson
Sujit D Rathod
Andrew Guise
PJ Annand
Paniz Hosseini
Kate Bowgett
Martin Burrows
author_sort Alec Miners
title Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
title_short Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
title_full Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
title_fullStr Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
title_full_unstemmed Peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in London, UK: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
title_sort peer advocacy and access to healthcare for people who are homeless in london, uk: a mixed method impact, economic and process evaluation protocol
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
series BMJ Open
issn 2044-6055
publishDate 2021-06-01
description Introduction People who are homeless experience higher morbidity and mortality than the general population. These outcomes are exacerbated by inequitable access to healthcare. Emerging evidence suggests a role for peer advocates—that is, trained volunteers with lived experience—to support people who are homeless to access healthcare.Methods and analysis We plan to conduct a mixed methods evaluation to assess the effects (qualitative, cohort and economic studies); processes and contexts (qualitative study); fidelity; and acceptability and reach (process study) of Peer Advocacy on people who are homeless and on peers themselves in London, UK. People with lived experience of homelessness are partners in the design, execution, analysis and dissemination of the evaluation.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for all study designs has been granted by the National Health Service London—Dulwich Research Ethics Committee (UK) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine’s Ethics Committee (UK). We plan to disseminate study progress and outputs via a website, conference presentations, community meetings and peer-reviewed journal articles.
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e050717.full
work_keys_str_mv AT alecminers peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT deemenezes peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT serenaluchenski peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT alistairstory peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT lucyplatt peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT elizabethwilliamson peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT sujitdrathod peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT andrewguise peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT pjannand peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT panizhosseini peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT katebowgett peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
AT martinburrows peeradvocacyandaccesstohealthcareforpeoplewhoarehomelessinlondonukamixedmethodimpacteconomicandprocessevaluationprotocol
_version_ 1721216834804383744