首页> 外文OA文献 >Should we 'hug a hoodie'? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions with young people not in employment, education or training (so-called NEETs)
【2h】

Should we 'hug a hoodie'? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions with young people not in employment, education or training (so-called NEETs)

机译:我们应该“拥抱帽衫”吗?对未就业,未受教育或培训的年轻人进行干预的系统评价和荟萃分析的协议(所谓的NEET)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Whilst the majority of young people succeed in education and make a positive transition to the world of work and adult life, recent statistics identify that youth comprise 40 of the world's unemployed, equating to nearly 75 million individuals. These numbers are associated with both decreased economic activity and adverse well-being, with accompanying social, health and financial costs. As a result, a wide range of providers have implemented interventions targeting this population; however, their relative effectiveness is unknown. This is exacerbated by a diverse literature base, the delivery of provision and policy across multiple sectors and disparate approaches to programme evaluation. Methods and design: We will undertake a systematic review of interventions targeting youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) populations. Only randomised and non-randomised controlled trials will be included. The objectives of the review will be to: (i) systematically review, synthesise and quality appraise experimental evidence on the effects of interventions with NEET young people, (ii) estimate effects on current NEET status, well-being and other relevant psychological and behavioural outcomes, (iii) investigate potential variation in intervention effects among sub-groups stratified by pre-trial duration of current status, socioeconomic status, gender, sub-classifications of NEET individuals and intervention components (e.g. type, frequency, duration, provider and setting) and (iv) assess the robustness of results in separate sensitivity analyses that exclude studies with higher risk of bias (e.g. in terms of study quality) or follow-up length. A rigorous literature search of English language publications post-1990 will be conducted using the following electronic databases: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, EPPI-Centre (Bibliomap), Social Science Citation Index, British Education Index, Conference Proceedings Index, Dissertation Abstracts, Popline and grey literature collections (e.g. GLADNET). These database searches will be supplemented with hand searching, requests for unpublished literature and website searches. Discussion: A report and executive summary will be developed by the research team with input from consultant stakeholders to aid translation of the findings into practice. The research will be disseminated at national and international conferences and submitted for peer-reviewed publication. © 2014 Oliver et al.
机译:背景:虽然大多数年轻人成功地接受了教育,并向工作和成人生活领域积极过渡,但最近的统计数据表明,青年人占世界失业人口的40%,即近7500万人。这些数字与减少的经济活动和不利的福祉相关,并伴随着社会,健康和财务成本。结果,各种各样的提供者针对该人群实施了干预措施;但是,它们的相对有效性尚不清楚。多元化的文献基础,跨多个部门的规定和政策的交付以及方案评估的不同方法,加剧了这一点。方法和设计:我们将对针对非就业,教育或培训(NEET)人群中的年轻人的干预措施进行系统的评估。仅包括随机和非随机对照试验。审查的目的是:(i)系统地审查,综合和质量评价NEET青年干预效果的实验证据;(ii)估计其对当前NEET状况,幸福感及其他相关心理和行为的影响结果,(iii)调查亚组之间干预效果的潜在差异,这些亚组按当前状态的预审持续时间,社会经济状况,性别,NEET个人的亚分类以及干预成分(例如类型,频率,持续时间,提供者和环境)进行分层)和(iv)在单独的敏感性分析中评估结果的稳健性,该敏感性分析排除了存在较高偏倚风险(例如,就研究质量而言)或随访时间较长的研究。将使用以下电子数据库对1990年后英语出版物进行严格的文献检索:Medline,Embase,PsycINFO,ERIC,EPPI-Centre(书架图),社会科学引文索引,英国教育索引,会议录索引,论文摘要,Popline和灰色文献集(例如GLADNET)。这些数据库搜索将通过手工搜索,对未发表文献的请求和网站搜索得到补充。讨论:研究团队将在顾问利益相关者的意见下编写报告和执行摘要,以帮助将发现转化为实践。该研究将在国家和国际会议上进行传播,并提交同行评审发表。 ©2014 Oliver等人。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号