Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Policies and Interventions that Improve Health, Psychosocial, and Economic Outcomes for Young People Leaving the Out-of-Home Care System.

IF 5.4 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Trauma Violence & Abuse Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1177/15248380241253041
David Taylor, Bianca Albers, Georgina Mann, Jane Lewis, Russell Taylor, Philip Mendes, Geraldine Macdonald, Aron Shlonsky
{"title":"Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Policies and Interventions that Improve Health, Psychosocial, and Economic Outcomes for Young People Leaving the Out-of-Home Care System.","authors":"David Taylor, Bianca Albers, Georgina Mann, Jane Lewis, Russell Taylor, Philip Mendes, Geraldine Macdonald, Aron Shlonsky","doi":"10.1177/15248380241253041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Young people who transition to adulthood from out-of-home care (OOHC) are more likely to experience a range of poorer outcomes relative to their same-age peers in the community. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of policies or interventions (hereafter \"interventions\") aimed at improving housing, health, education, economic, and psychosocial outcomes for youth leaving OOHC (hereafter \"care leavers\"). Eleven databases of published literature were reviewed along with gray literature. Eligible studies used randomized or quasi-experimental designs and assessed interventions that provided support to care leavers prior to, during, or after they left OOHC. Primary outcomes were housing and homelessness, health and well-being, education, economic and employment, criminal and delinquent behavior, and risky behavior, while secondary outcomes were supportive relationships and life skills. Where possible, results were pooled in a meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Fourteen studies published in 27 reports were identified that examined independent living programs (ILPs) (<i>n</i> = 5), intensive support services (<i>n</i> = 2), coaching and peer support (C&PSP) (<i>n</i> = 2), transitional housing (<i>n</i> = 1), health information or coaching (<i>n</i> = 2), and extended care (<i>n</i> = 2). All but one study was conducted in the United States. Twenty small meta-analyses were undertaken encompassing ILPs and C&PSP, with two showing results that favored the intervention with certainty. The level of confidence in each meta-analysis was considered very low. A significant risk of bias was identified in each of the included studies. While some interventions showed promise, particularly extended care, the scope and strength of included evidence is insufficient to recommend any included approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":54211,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","volume":" ","pages":"3534-3554"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11545139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241253041","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Young people who transition to adulthood from out-of-home care (OOHC) are more likely to experience a range of poorer outcomes relative to their same-age peers in the community. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of policies or interventions (hereafter "interventions") aimed at improving housing, health, education, economic, and psychosocial outcomes for youth leaving OOHC (hereafter "care leavers"). Eleven databases of published literature were reviewed along with gray literature. Eligible studies used randomized or quasi-experimental designs and assessed interventions that provided support to care leavers prior to, during, or after they left OOHC. Primary outcomes were housing and homelessness, health and well-being, education, economic and employment, criminal and delinquent behavior, and risky behavior, while secondary outcomes were supportive relationships and life skills. Where possible, results were pooled in a meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Fourteen studies published in 27 reports were identified that examined independent living programs (ILPs) (n = 5), intensive support services (n = 2), coaching and peer support (C&PSP) (n = 2), transitional housing (n = 1), health information or coaching (n = 2), and extended care (n = 2). All but one study was conducted in the United States. Twenty small meta-analyses were undertaken encompassing ILPs and C&PSP, with two showing results that favored the intervention with certainty. The level of confidence in each meta-analysis was considered very low. A significant risk of bias was identified in each of the included studies. While some interventions showed promise, particularly extended care, the scope and strength of included evidence is insufficient to recommend any included approach.

对改善离开家庭外护理系统的年轻人的健康、社会心理和经济成果的政策和干预措施进行系统回顾和元分析。
与社区中的同龄人相比,从家庭外照料(OOHC)过渡到成年的年轻人更有可能经历一系列较差的结果。本系统性综述评估了旨在改善脱离家庭外照料的青少年(以下简称 "脱离照料者")的住房、健康、教育、经济和社会心理状况的政策或干预措施(以下简称 "干预措施")的有效性。我们查阅了 11 个已出版文献数据库以及灰色文献。符合条件的研究采用了随机或准实验设计,并评估了在离开 OOHC 之前、期间或之后为离开者提供支持的干预措施。主要结果是住房和无家可归、健康和幸福、教育、经济和就业、犯罪和不良行为以及危险行为,次要结果是支持性关系和生活技能。在可能的情况下,将结果集中进行荟萃分析。采用 "建议分级评估"(Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation)对证据的确定性进行了评估。我们在 27 份报告中发现了 14 项研究,这些研究对独立生活计划 (ILP) (n=5)、强化支持服务 (n=2)、辅导和同伴支持 (C&PSP) (n=2)、过渡性住房 (n=1)、健康信息或辅导 (n=2) 以及延伸护理 (n=2) 进行了研究。除一项研究外,其他研究均在美国进行。20 项小型荟萃分析涵盖了 ILPs 和 C&PSP,其中两项分析结果显示干预措施更有把握。每项荟萃分析的可信度都很低。每项纳入的研究都存在严重的偏倚风险。虽然一些干预措施显示出前景,尤其是延伸护理,但所纳入证据的范围和强度不足以推荐任何纳入的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
7.80%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is devoted to organizing, synthesizing, and expanding knowledge on all force of trauma, abuse, and violence. This peer-reviewed journal is practitioner oriented and will publish only reviews of research, conceptual or theoretical articles, and law review articles. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is dedicated to professionals and advanced students in clinical training who work with any form of trauma, abuse, and violence. It is intended to compile knowledge that clearly affects practice, policy, and research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信