What is the effect of intergenerational activities on the wellbeing and mental health of children and young people?: A systematic review

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Fiona Campbell, Rebecca Whear, Morwenna Rogers, Anthea Sutton, Jane Barlow, Andrew Booth, Andrew Tattersall, Louise Wolstenholme, Joanna Thompson-Coon
{"title":"What is the effect of intergenerational activities on the wellbeing and mental health of children and young people?: A systematic review","authors":"Fiona Campbell,&nbsp;Rebecca Whear,&nbsp;Morwenna Rogers,&nbsp;Anthea Sutton,&nbsp;Jane Barlow,&nbsp;Andrew Booth,&nbsp;Andrew Tattersall,&nbsp;Louise Wolstenholme,&nbsp;Joanna Thompson-Coon","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Societal changes have led to greater isolation and higher levels of loneliness particularly for older generations. Loneliness is a significant public health challenge leading to increased levels of poor mental health. Depression and anxiety are also increasing in prevalence amongst children and young people. Intergenerational activities are interventions designed to bring together older and younger generations with the purpose of allowing participants to utilise their experiences and skills, and to give participants a chance to experience the pleasure and excitement that occurs with the transmission of knowledge and skills from one generation to another. Intergenerational activities are therefore potential interventions that can address the growing problems associated with loneliness and lack of wellbeing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review aims to examine the impact of intergenerational interventions on the wellbeing and mental health in children and adolescents, and potential harmful effects. It also aims to identify areas for future research as well as key messages for service commissioners.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Search Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched an evidence and gap map published in 2022 (comprehensive searches conducted July 2021 and updated June 2023) to identify randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that report mental health and wellbeing outcomes for children and young people.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\n \n <p>Randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that involved unrelated younger and older people with at least one skipped generation between them and reported mental health or wellbeing outcomes for children and young people were included in this review.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\n \n <p>We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We conducted data extraction and Cochrane risk of bias assessments in EPPI reviewer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Results</h3>\n \n <p>While we identified 500 evaluations of intergenerational interventions, where the impact on participating children and/or young people was evaluated this was most often limited to assessing their impact on attitudes to aging. We identified five studies evaluating five different types of intergenerational interventions which included one-off sessions to ones that spanned a year measuring their impact on the mental health and wellbeing of children and/or young people. The purposes of the interventions differed, which included promoting social skills, preventing harmful behaviour and promoting learning. The ages of children also varied across the five studies, with one targeting younger children, two targeting younger teenagers and two targeting older teenagers. One study included socioeconomically disadvantaged children, and in the other studies the socioeconomic backgrounds of the children and young people were not described. The outcome measures used to evaluate the interventions varied with none of the studies measuring the same outcomes. One study showed improvements in wellbeing measures, and this was an intervention delivered to children in deprived neighbourhoods, where the intervention duration was for a year allowing the development of a greater depth of relationship between the younger and older participants. Four studies found no……. The included studies were at high risk of bias therefore raising uncertainty in the reliability of the findings. Underpinning theories that supported the development of the interventions and explained the mechanisms of effect were poorly described.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Authors' Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The evidence for the effectiveness of intergenerational interventions on the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people is limited and inconclusive. Few evaluations have sought to measure how intergenerational interventions impact children and young people and where this impact is measured the focus is usually limited to attitudes to aging. The evidence that has been collected is too heterogenous to allow synthesis of the findings. The underpinning theories to support their development are poorly described with no follow-up data to ascertain if benefits are maintained. Intergenerational interventions show promise but researchers have failed to measure how they impact on the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people. This is a serious limitation of the evidence base that needs to be addressed in robust and rigorous evaluations.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1429","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1429","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Societal changes have led to greater isolation and higher levels of loneliness particularly for older generations. Loneliness is a significant public health challenge leading to increased levels of poor mental health. Depression and anxiety are also increasing in prevalence amongst children and young people. Intergenerational activities are interventions designed to bring together older and younger generations with the purpose of allowing participants to utilise their experiences and skills, and to give participants a chance to experience the pleasure and excitement that occurs with the transmission of knowledge and skills from one generation to another. Intergenerational activities are therefore potential interventions that can address the growing problems associated with loneliness and lack of wellbeing.

Objectives

This systematic review aims to examine the impact of intergenerational interventions on the wellbeing and mental health in children and adolescents, and potential harmful effects. It also aims to identify areas for future research as well as key messages for service commissioners.

Search Methods

We searched an evidence and gap map published in 2022 (comprehensive searches conducted July 2021 and updated June 2023) to identify randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that report mental health and wellbeing outcomes for children and young people.

Selection Criteria

Randomised controlled trials of intergenerational interventions that involved unrelated younger and older people with at least one skipped generation between them and reported mental health or wellbeing outcomes for children and young people were included in this review.

Data Collection and Analysis

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We conducted data extraction and Cochrane risk of bias assessments in EPPI reviewer.

Main Results

While we identified 500 evaluations of intergenerational interventions, where the impact on participating children and/or young people was evaluated this was most often limited to assessing their impact on attitudes to aging. We identified five studies evaluating five different types of intergenerational interventions which included one-off sessions to ones that spanned a year measuring their impact on the mental health and wellbeing of children and/or young people. The purposes of the interventions differed, which included promoting social skills, preventing harmful behaviour and promoting learning. The ages of children also varied across the five studies, with one targeting younger children, two targeting younger teenagers and two targeting older teenagers. One study included socioeconomically disadvantaged children, and in the other studies the socioeconomic backgrounds of the children and young people were not described. The outcome measures used to evaluate the interventions varied with none of the studies measuring the same outcomes. One study showed improvements in wellbeing measures, and this was an intervention delivered to children in deprived neighbourhoods, where the intervention duration was for a year allowing the development of a greater depth of relationship between the younger and older participants. Four studies found no……. The included studies were at high risk of bias therefore raising uncertainty in the reliability of the findings. Underpinning theories that supported the development of the interventions and explained the mechanisms of effect were poorly described.

Authors' Conclusions

The evidence for the effectiveness of intergenerational interventions on the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people is limited and inconclusive. Few evaluations have sought to measure how intergenerational interventions impact children and young people and where this impact is measured the focus is usually limited to attitudes to aging. The evidence that has been collected is too heterogenous to allow synthesis of the findings. The underpinning theories to support their development are poorly described with no follow-up data to ascertain if benefits are maintained. Intergenerational interventions show promise but researchers have failed to measure how they impact on the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people. This is a serious limitation of the evidence base that needs to be addressed in robust and rigorous evaluations.

Abstract Image

代际活动对儿童和青少年的福祉和心理健康有何影响?系统回顾
背景 社会变革导致人们更加孤独,尤其是老一代人的孤独感更强。孤独是一项重大的公共卫生挑战,会导致心理健康水平下降。抑郁症和焦虑症在儿童和青少年中的发病率也在上升。代际活动是一种干预措施,旨在将老一代人和年轻一代人聚集在一起,让参与者利用他们的经验和技能,并让参与者有机会体验知识和技能代代相传所带来的快乐和兴奋。因此,代际活动是一种潜在的干预措施,可以解决与孤独和缺乏幸福感相关的日益严重的问题。 目标 本系统综述旨在研究代际干预对儿童和青少年福祉和心理健康的影响,以及潜在的有害影响。它还旨在确定未来研究的领域以及为服务委托人提供的关键信息。 检索方法 我们检索了 2022 年发布的证据和差距图(2021 年 7 月进行了全面检索,2023 年 6 月进行了更新),以确定报告儿童和青少年心理健康和幸福结果的代际干预随机对照试验。 选择标准 本综述纳入了有关代际干预的随机对照试验,这些试验涉及无亲属关系的年轻人和老年人,他们之间至少隔了一代人,并报告了儿童和青少年的心理健康或幸福结果。 数据收集与分析 我们采用了坎贝尔协作组织所要求的标准方法程序。我们在 EPPI 评审员中进行了数据提取和 Cochrane 偏倚风险评估。 主要结果 虽然我们发现了 500 项关于代际干预的评估,但在评估对参与儿童和/或年轻人的影响时,大多仅限于评估其对老龄化态度的影响。我们发现有五项研究对五种不同类型的代际干预措施进行了评估,其中包括一次性课程和持续一年的课程,以衡量其对儿童和/或青少年心理健康和福祉的影响。干预的目的各不相同,包括促进社交技能、预防有害行为和促进学习。五项研究中儿童的年龄也各不相同,其中一项研究的对象是年龄较小的儿童,两项研究的对象是年龄较小的青少年,两项研究的对象是年龄较大的青少年。有一项研究的对象是社会经济条件较差的儿童,而其他研究则未说明儿童和青少年的社会经济背景。用于评估干预措施的结果测量方法各不相同,没有一项研究测量相同的结果。有一项研究显示,干预措施改善了儿童的幸福指数,这是一项针对贫困社区儿童的干预措施,干预持续时间为一年,使年龄较小的参与者和年龄较大的参与者之间建立了更深层次的关系。四项研究没有发现.......。所纳入的研究存在较高的偏倚风险,因此研究结果的可靠性存在不确定性。支持干预措施发展和解释效果机制的基础理论描述不充分。 作者的结论 有关代际干预对儿童和青少年心理健康和幸福的有效性的证据很有限,而且没有定论。很少有评估试图衡量代际干预对儿童和青少年的影响,而在衡量这种影响时,重点通常仅限于对老龄化的态度。已收集到的证据过于分散,无法对评估结果进行综合。支持其发展的基础理论描述不清,也没有后续数据来确定其效益是否得以保持。代际干预措施显示了前景,但研究人员未能衡量这些措施对儿童和青年的心理健康和福祉的影响。
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
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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