Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38756221›Full record

ArticleCampbell systematic reviews2024

Protocol: The effect of restorative justice interventions for young people on offending and reoffending: A systematic review.

Hannah Gaffney, Darrick Jolliffe, Elizabeth Eggins, Joana Gomes Ferreira, Guy Skinner, Barak Ariel, Heather Strang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Campbell systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Hannah GaffneyClare Hall College University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Darrick JolliffeRoyal Holloway University London UK.
Elizabeth EgginsMetro North Mental Health, Queensland Health Brisbane Queensland Australia.
Joana Gomes FerreiraDepartment of Social and Policy Sciences Univeristy of Bath Bath United Kingdom.
Guy SkinnerDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Barak ArielInstitute of Criminology University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Heather StrangInstitute of Criminology University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The primary aim of this mixed methods review is to synthesise the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of restorative justice interventions (RJIs) for reducing offending and reoffending outcomes in children and young people. We are also particularly interested in the impact of RJIs on children and young peoples' violent offending and violent reoffending. A second aim of the review is to examine whether the magnitude of effectiveness of RJIs may be influenced by study characteristics such as the population (e.g., age, ethnicity, or sex), the form of intervention (e.g., face-to-face mediation compared to family group conferencing), the place of delivery of the intervention (e.g., in independent office, in court), implementation (e.g., trained facilitators, dose, fidelity) and methodology (e.g., randomised controlled trial). The third aim of the review is to synthesise the qualitative evidence about RJ to develop a better contextual understanding of how these programmes may work and to elucidate factors that might increase the efficacy and implementation of RJ interventions. The specific research questions this systematic review aims to address are: (1) Do RJ interventions reduce children and young people's involvement in offending or reoffending relative to a comparison group? [RQ1]. (2) Is there variation in the impact of different RJ approaches on young people's involvement in offending or reoffending? [RQ2]. (3) Is there variation in the impact of RJIs on children and young people's offending or reoffending depending on the characteristics of the participants taking part in the RJI (e.g., sex, age, ethnicity)? [RQ3]. (4) What characteristics of RJIs, influence the effectiveness of RJIs for children and young people's offending and reoffending? [RQ4]. (5) What are the most notable barriers and facilitators, as reported by participants (e.g., the victims, children/young people, or mediators who have taken part in an evaluation of an RJI, or those children or young people who were meant to take part in an evaluation but ultimately did not), to the implementation of RJIs to reduce later offending or reoffending? [RQ5].

Identifiers

PMID38756221
PMCPMC11096643

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.