Table 1

The 8 Peers for Progress Studies

Site Number Lead Investigator	Country Region	Project Description	Setting	Ethical Review Structure (National Bodies/Local Committee
1. Ayala¹⁷	United States, southern California	Peer-support intervention with emphasis on volunteer model and navigating family, community, and clinical environments, among Mexican and Mexican-American adults along US-Mexico border	Community and clinical setting; coordinated by a university-based research team	FDA, DHHS, OHRP, University Ethics Committee
2. Bodenheimer¹⁸	United States, San Francisco	Integration of peer supporters and peer coaching into nurse/doctor treatment teams among clinics serving Latino, Caucasian, and African American populations	Community setting with telephone and clinical links; coordinated by a university-based research team	FDA, DHHS, OHRP, University Ethics Committee
3. Chan¹⁹	China, Hong Kong SAR	Peer support, empowerment, and web-based disease management linked by telephone information technology	Telephone and web-based peer support with community components; coordinated by a university-based research team	Chinese University of Hong Kong-NTEC, CREC
4. Knox²⁰	United States, Texas	Application of a peer-support intervention shown to be effective among low-income, Latino populations in Los Angeles, California to an older, insured, mixed-race, middle-class population	Peer-defined settings combined with technology-based interaction; coordinated by a national research network in partnership with community groups	FDA, DHHS, OHRP, Academy Ethics Committee
5. Oldenburg²¹	Australia, Victoria	Revision of existing NGO peer-support program to focus on improved daily management, linkages to care, and implications for national dissemination	Non-clinical, community-based, rural and urban groups; coordinated by a university-based research team	NHMRC, AHEC, University Ethics Committee
6. Safford²²	United States, rural Alabama	Community-based peer advisors delivering one-on-one telephone coaching for patient-driven self-management support emphasizing empowerment.	Predominantly African American communities in rural Alabama; coordinated by a university-based research team	FDA, DHHS, OHRP, University Ethics Committee
7. Simmons and Graffy²³	United Kingdom, Cambridgeshire and bordering areas	Peer-facilitated support delivered in group, 1:1 or group, and 1:1 format (with control group) in rural England	Non-clinical, community-based, rural and urban groups; coordinated by a hospital-based research team	NHS, NRES, Regional REC
8. Tang and Heisler^24,25	United States, Michigan	Peer-led self-management support in “real-world” clinical and community settings among Latinos and African Americans, respectively	Clinical and community settings; coordinated by a university-based research team	FDA, DHHS, OHRP, University Ethics Committee

AHEC = Australian Health Ethics Committee; CREC = Clinical Research Ethics Committee; FDA = US Food and Drug Administration; DHHS = US Department of Health and Human Services; NHMRC: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; NHS = UK National Health Service; NRES = UK National Research Ethics Service; NTEC = New Territories East Cluster; OHRP = US Office for Human Research Protection; REC = Research Ethics Committee