ArticlePloS one2025
The multisystemic roots of South African child and youth resilience: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectiveA multisystemic approach to researching resilience investigates resources across multiple systems, including biological, psychological, social, institutional, structural, environmental, and cultural systems, with special interest in how these resources co-act to enable better-than-expected outcomes among risk-exposed children and youth. This approach is an important step toward redressing neoliberal misinterpretations of resilience as a personal capacity. However, it is unclear how well a multisystemic approach is reflected in recent studies of child and youth resilience conducted in South Africa, a country where ongoing structural violence demands resilience from most children and youth. In response, this article reports a scoping review of South African child and youth resilience studies published between 2018 and 2023. METHODOLOGY: The methodology aligned with the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. The authors systematically scoped the available literature (n = 1309 records) to determine which resources from which systems were associated with the resilience of South African children and youth (birth to 29 years). Using a multisystem resilience framework, the narrative review of 99 eligible studies documents the biological, psychological, social, institutional, structural, environmental and cultural resources that enabled better-than-expected outcomes among risk-exposed children and youth.
resultsPsychological and social resources were more prominently reported than biological, institutional, structural, environmental or cultural resources. Two-thirds of the included studies reported resources from two or more systems, with psychological and social systems dominating multisystem studies. Despite the inclusion of multiple systems, studies seldom reported co-acting resources. DISCUSSION: Although the attention to resources across multiple systems is encouraging, child and youth resilience agendas will be better served by studies that document co-acting resources. This will allow policymakers and service providers to gauge the additive effects of multiple resources and which combinations of resources are most likely to advance young people's resilience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.