Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32977770›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2020

Risk factors associated with knife-crime in United Kingdom among young people aged 10-24 years: a systematic review.

Sara Haylock, Talia Boshari, Emma C Alexander, Ameeta Kumar, Logan Manikam, Richard Pinder

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Preventing Youth Crime and Violence: Intervention and Evaluation Issues.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  8. Devising a pathway from police contact to psychosocial support: reflexive thematic analysis of interviews with youth, families, police and services.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sara HaylockDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK. sarahaylock@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7650-7527
Talia BoshariDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Emma C AlexanderLondon North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ameeta KumarFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Logan ManikamAceso Global Health Consultants Limited, London, UK.
Richard PinderDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince 2013, the number of violent crimes and offences by sharp instruments have increased continually, following a previous decrease, with majority of cases occurring among young people and in London. There is limited understanding surrounding the drivers influencing this change in trends, with mostly American-based research identifying risk factors.

methodsThe aim of this review is to identify and synthesise evidence from a range of literature to identify risk factors associated with weapon-related crime, for young people (aged 10-24 years) within the UK. A search strategy was generated to conduct a systematic search of published and grey literature within four databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, and OpenGrey), identifying papers within a UK-context. Abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers to assess eligibility for inclusion, namely study focus in line with the objectives of the review. Weight of Evidence approach was utilised to assess paper quality, resulting in inclusion of 16 papers. Thematic analysis was conducted for studies to identity and categorise risk factors according to the WHO ecological model.

resultsNo association was found between gender or ethnicity and youth violence, contrasting current understanding shown within media. Multiple research papers identified adverse childhood experiences and poor mental health as positively associated with youth and gang violence. It was suggested that community and societal risk factors, such as discrimination and economic inequality, were frequently linked to youth violence. A small number of studies were included within the review as this is a growing field of research, which may have led to a constrained number of risk factors identified. Due to heterogeneity of studies, a meta-analysis could not be conducted. As many studies displayed positive results, publication bias may be present.

conclusionsSeveral risk factors were identified, with evidence currently heterogeneous with minimal high-quality studies. However, findings highlight key areas for future research, including the link between poor mental health and knife-crime, and the trajectory into gangs. Risk factors should help identify high-risk individuals, targeting them within mitigation strategies to prevent involvement within crime. This should contribute to efforts aimed at reducing the rising crime rates within UK. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019138545 . Registered at PROSPSERO: 16/08/2019.

Indexed as

CrimeViolenceAdolescentAdultChildHumansLondonRisk FactorsUnited KingdomYoung AdultAdolescent behaviourGang membershipGang violenceKnife crimeRisk factorsWeapon-related crimeYouth violence

Identifiers

PMID32977770
PMCPMC7517802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.