Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39850738›Full record

ArticleThe journal of forensic psychiatry & psychology2025

Developing evidence for a national strategy for older adults in the criminal justice system: overview of the nominal group approach for this series of brief reports.

Adam O'Neill, Jennifer Shaw, Leanne Heathcote, Thomas Hewson, Lee Mulligan, Louise Robinson, Anna Newton-Clarke, Ellie Thompson, Evelyn Wong, Kim Barnett and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of forensic psychiatry & psychology, 2025. 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. Older women in the criminal justice system: a brief report from a nominal group.The journal of forensic psychiatry & psychology · 2025
    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

20 authors.

Adam O'NeillDivision of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jennifer ShawDivision of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Leanne HeathcoteHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Thomas HewsonHealth and Justice Research Network, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9879-9292
Lee MulliganDivision of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Louise RobinsonHealth and Justice Research Network, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Anna Newton-ClarkeHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Ellie ThompsonHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Evelyn WongHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Kim BarnettSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Fiona LerigoSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jana BowdenHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Kerry GutridgeDivision of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matilda MinchinHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Dawn EdgeDivision of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Stuart WareRestore Support Network, Dorset, UK.
Rhian FalveyHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Catherine A RobinsonSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jane SeniorHealth and Justice Research Network, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Katrina ForsythSocial Care and Society, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of people aged 50 and over entering the criminal justice system (CJS) in England and Wales is growing. This raises questions as to the suitability of the CJS to equitably accommodate individuals with complex illness or impairment, who might experience difficulties in cognitive function, frailty, and/or impaired mobility. Findings from the government, the third sector, and academic literature have highlighted the difficulties experienced by older adults in the CJS and those tasked with supporting them. To inform the development of the Ministry of Justice's national strategy for older people in prison, we conducted a series of nominal focus groups with policy makers, practitioners, prison staff, representatives from the third sector, and academics, each focusing on a specific topic area that impacts older adults in prison. These were: 1) older adult trajectories; 2) long term conditions; 3) dementia; 4) mental health; 5) social care; 6) end of life care; 7) women; 8) ethnicity; and 9) COVID-19. An additional nominal group was also held with older adults currently in prison to discuss what they thought should be included in the national strategy more broadly. This paper presents the methodology of the nominal groups and subsequent analysis, as well as providing a rationale for the research. It serves as a precursor to a series of papers reporting and discussing the findings of the topic-specific nominal groups.

Indexed as

criminal justice systemnominal groupsOlder adultsprisonthematic analysis

Identifiers

PMID39850738
PMCPMC11755264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.