Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41348288›Full record

ArticleHealth & justice2025

A content analysis of caregiver perspectives on strengths and protective factors in youth with FASD and criminal legal system involvement.

Chantel Ritter, Kaitlyn McLachlan, Oriana De Wolff, C Meghan McMurtry, Margaret Lumley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health & justice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Chantel RitterUniversity of Guelph, Guelph, Canada. ritterc@uoguelph.ca.
Kaitlyn McLachlanUniversity of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
Oriana De WolffUniversity of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
C Meghan McMurtryUniversity of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
Margaret LumleyUniversity of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Youth with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) experience complex challenges and may be at an increased risk of contact with the criminal legal system (CLS). However, youth and their families often have strengths and resources that can be leveraged to support positive outcomes. Research in both the FASD and the youth CLS literatures have been predominantly deficit-focused, research that includes strengths and protective factors presents a more balanced perspective and is being recognized as important for youth with FASD. As such, using a directed content analysis guided by the Values in Action (VIA) character strengths framework, the current study explored the perspectives of caregivers regarding strengths and protective factors present in their youth with FASD and CLS involvement. Caregivers reported on 32 independent youth (87.5% male), all of whom had confirmed or suspected FASD and had current or past involvement with the criminal legal system between the ages of 12 and 24. Caregivers mentioned individual-level strengths and protective factors most frequently, followed by relational/familial level factors and broader contextual level factors. Of the individual-level strengths mentioned, over three quarters (76.4%) fell within the VIA character strengths framework. Results suggest that strengths are present in this population across ecological system levels. Findings contribute to a shared understanding of factors that promote overall wellbeing for youth with FASD and CLS involvement from a caregiver perspective. Approaches promoting strengths use may be an advantageous, under-researched method for enhancing well-being in this population.

Identifiers

PMID41348288
PMCPMC12681167

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.