Rhiannon Evans, Rob Trubey, Sarah MacDonald, Jane Noyes, Michael Robling, Simone Willis, Maria Boffey, Charlotte Wooders, Soo Vinnicombe, G. J. Melendez-Torres
{"title":"What Mental Health and Wellbeing Interventions Work for Which Children and Young People in Care? Systematic Review of Potential Outcome Inequities","authors":"Rhiannon Evans, Rob Trubey, Sarah MacDonald, Jane Noyes, Michael Robling, Simone Willis, Maria Boffey, Charlotte Wooders, Soo Vinnicombe, G. J. Melendez-Torres","doi":"10.1007/s10560-023-00956-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Children and young people with care-experience (e.g. foster, kinship and residential care) report poorer mental health and wellbeing than the general population. Despite an emerging evidence-base for intervention, it is not clear if current approaches create, exacerbate or mitigate outcome inequities between different types of participants. We conducted a systematic review of international interventions targeting mental health, subjective wellbeing and suicide-related outcomes amongst care-experienced children and young people aged up to 25 years old. The review included a narrative synthesis of intervention inequities, exploring if they were more or less effective for different participant groups. Eight interventions, with 14 study reports, presented relevant data. Overall, there was no clear evidence that intervention participation could lead to inequitable impacts, being more or less effective for different groups. However, there was some tentative indication that individuals with lower exposure to maltreatment, fewer care placements, and increased baseline mental health problems, might be more responsive to intervention than other participants. There was limited evidence for wellbeing and no data availability for suicide. Future intervention evaluation should focus on assessing if there is potential to create, sustain or exacerbate inequities, and how approaches may be designed to mitigate this risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":51512,"journal":{"name":"Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-023-00956-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Children and young people with care-experience (e.g. foster, kinship and residential care) report poorer mental health and wellbeing than the general population. Despite an emerging evidence-base for intervention, it is not clear if current approaches create, exacerbate or mitigate outcome inequities between different types of participants. We conducted a systematic review of international interventions targeting mental health, subjective wellbeing and suicide-related outcomes amongst care-experienced children and young people aged up to 25 years old. The review included a narrative synthesis of intervention inequities, exploring if they were more or less effective for different participant groups. Eight interventions, with 14 study reports, presented relevant data. Overall, there was no clear evidence that intervention participation could lead to inequitable impacts, being more or less effective for different groups. However, there was some tentative indication that individuals with lower exposure to maltreatment, fewer care placements, and increased baseline mental health problems, might be more responsive to intervention than other participants. There was limited evidence for wellbeing and no data availability for suicide. Future intervention evaluation should focus on assessing if there is potential to create, sustain or exacerbate inequities, and how approaches may be designed to mitigate this risk.
期刊介绍:
The Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal (CASW) features original articles that focus on social work practice with children, adolescents, and their families. Topics include issues affecting a variety of specific populations in special settings. CASW welcomes a range of scholarly contributions focused on children and adolescents, including theoretical papers, narrative case studies, historical analyses, traditional reviews of the literature, descriptive studies, single-system research designs, correlational investigations, methodological works, pre-experimental, quasi-experimental and experimental evaluations, meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Manuscripts involving qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods are welcome to be submitted, as are papers grounded in one or more theoretical orientations, or those that are not based on any formal theory. CASW values different disciplines and interdisciplinary work that informs social work practice and policy. Authors from public health, nursing, psychology, sociology, and other disciplines are encouraged to submit manuscripts. All manuscripts should include specific implications for social work policy and practice with children and adolescents. Appropriate fields of practice include interpersonal practice, small groups, families, organizations, communities, policy practice, nationally-oriented work, and international studies. Authors considering publication in CASW should review the following editorial: Schelbe, L., & Thyer, B. A. (2019). Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal Editorial Policy: Guidelines for Authors. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 36, 75-80.