Life story work for children and young people with care experience: A scoping review

Q2 Social Sciences
S. Hammond, Julie K. Young, C. Duddy
{"title":"Life story work for children and young people with care experience: A scoping review","authors":"S. Hammond, Julie K. Young, C. Duddy","doi":"10.1177/2516103220985872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This scoping review was undertaken to provide an overview of peer-reviewed empirical evidence concerning the undertaking of Life Story Work (LSW) with children and young people with care experience (CYPCE). Our search identified 1,336 potentially relevant publications. Of these, 24 empirical studies met our inclusion criteria and examined a wide range of practices in different countries. Using a thematic approach, key findings and characteristics related to current conceptualizations of LSW are explored and knowledge gaps identified. Our review shows that predominantly small-scale qualitative studies have been undertaken. These studies typically reported participants’ experiences and perspectives on pre-existing LSW practices (17 articles), or evaluations of innovative practices (7 articles). However, both lacked efficacy data. We identified numerous LSW practices that were consistently identified as providing “high-quality” experiences: young person-led approaches; consistent support to access and process personal information, including chronological facts, reasons for care entry and beyond; the use of artifacts; and assistance/training for carers supporting LSW. The included studies also identified practices that undermined LSW: rushed, incomplete accounts, using insensitive language that failed to include different voices from a young person’s past. The discussion appraises the findings through a critical lens and concludes that LSW is a clear priority for all and represents an intervention that has potential to help the unaddressed mental health needs of CYPCE. Unfortunately, without better evidence on how this intervention works best, for whom, over what period, and at what cost, practice cannot move forward. This paper challenges all stakeholders to realize this potential.","PeriodicalId":36239,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Child Welfare","volume":"2 1","pages":"293 - 315"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2516103220985872","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Child Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103220985872","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

This scoping review was undertaken to provide an overview of peer-reviewed empirical evidence concerning the undertaking of Life Story Work (LSW) with children and young people with care experience (CYPCE). Our search identified 1,336 potentially relevant publications. Of these, 24 empirical studies met our inclusion criteria and examined a wide range of practices in different countries. Using a thematic approach, key findings and characteristics related to current conceptualizations of LSW are explored and knowledge gaps identified. Our review shows that predominantly small-scale qualitative studies have been undertaken. These studies typically reported participants’ experiences and perspectives on pre-existing LSW practices (17 articles), or evaluations of innovative practices (7 articles). However, both lacked efficacy data. We identified numerous LSW practices that were consistently identified as providing “high-quality” experiences: young person-led approaches; consistent support to access and process personal information, including chronological facts, reasons for care entry and beyond; the use of artifacts; and assistance/training for carers supporting LSW. The included studies also identified practices that undermined LSW: rushed, incomplete accounts, using insensitive language that failed to include different voices from a young person’s past. The discussion appraises the findings through a critical lens and concludes that LSW is a clear priority for all and represents an intervention that has potential to help the unaddressed mental health needs of CYPCE. Unfortunately, without better evidence on how this intervention works best, for whom, over what period, and at what cost, practice cannot move forward. This paper challenges all stakeholders to realize this potential.
有护理经验的儿童和青少年的生活故事工作:范围审查
这一范围审查是为了提供同行评议的经验证据的概述,这些证据涉及与有照顾经验的儿童和年轻人(CYPCE)一起开展的生活故事工作(LSW)。我们的搜索确定了1336篇可能相关的出版物。其中,24项实证研究符合我们的纳入标准,并检查了不同国家的广泛实践。使用主题方法,探索与当前LSW概念化相关的主要发现和特征,并确定知识差距。我们的回顾显示,主要是进行了小规模的定性研究。这些研究典型地报告了参与者对已有的LSW实践的经验和观点(17篇文章),或者对创新实践的评估(7篇文章)。然而,两者都缺乏疗效数据。我们确定了许多被一致认为提供“高质量”体验的LSW实践:年轻人主导的方法;始终如一地支持访问和处理个人信息,包括时间顺序事实、进入护理的原因等;人工制品的使用;以及为支援生活福利人士的照顾者提供协助/培训。纳入的研究还发现了破坏LSW的做法:匆忙、不完整的描述,使用不敏感的语言,未能包括年轻人过去的不同声音。讨论通过一个关键的镜头评估了这些发现,并得出结论,LSW是所有人的明确优先事项,并代表了一种有可能帮助CYPCE未解决的心理健康需求的干预措施。不幸的是,如果没有更好的证据证明这种干预如何最有效,对谁,在什么时期,以什么代价,实践无法向前发展。本文要求所有利益相关者认识到这一潜力。
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
Developmental Child Welfare
Developmental Child Welfare Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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