Treatment Foster Care for Improving Outcomes in Children and Young People
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Treatment foster care (‘TFC’) is a promising, individually tailored program for children and youth who are at risk of placement in restrictive settings. The results of this Campbell/Cochrane review suggests that TFC can lead to a reduction in antisocial and criminal behaviour, time spent in locked settings and absconsions. There is some evidence of a positive impact on school attendance and homework completion. Program developers conducted all five studies. The authors recommend that independent researchers also conduct research. Abstract Background Treatment foster care (TFC) is a foster family‐based intervention that aims to provide young people (and, where appropriate, their families) with a tailored programme designed to effect positive changes in their lives. TFC was designed specifically to cater for the needs of children whose difficulties or circumstances place them at risk of multiple placements and/or more restrictive placements such as hospital or secure residential or youth justice settings. Objectives To assess the impact of TFC on psychosocial and behavioural outcomes, delinquency, placement stability, and discharge status for children and adolescents who require out‐of‐home placement. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL) 2006 (Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2007), CINAHL (1982 to December 2006), PsycINFO (1872 to January 2007), ASSIA (1987 to January 2007), LILACS (1982 to January 2007), ERIC (1966 to January 2007), Sociological Abstracts (1963 to January 2007), and the National Research Register 2006 (Issue 4). Selection criteria Included studies were randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of TFC with children and young people up to the age of 18 who, for reasons of severe medical, social, psychological and behavioural problems, were placed in out of home care in restrictive settings (e.g. secure residential care, psychiatric hospital) or at risk of placement in such settings. Data collection & analysis Titles and abstracts identified in the search were independently assessed for eligibility by the two authors (GM and WT) who also extracted and entered into REVMAN. Date were synthesised on the few occasions where this was possible. Results are presented in tabular, graphical (forest plots) and textual form. Main results Five studies including 390 participants were included in this review. Data suggest that treatment foster care may be a useful intervention for children and young people with complex emotional, psychological and behavioural need, who are at risk of placements in non‐family settings that restrict their liberty and opportunities for social inclusion. Reviewers’ conclusions Although the inclusion criteria for this systematic review set a study design threshold higher than that of previous reviews, the results mirror those of earlier reviews but also highlight the tendency of the perceived effectiveness of popular interventions to outstrip their evidence base. Whilst the results of individual studies generally indicate that TFC is a promising intervention for children and youth experiencing mental health problems, behavioural problems or problems of delinquency, the evidence base is less robust than that usually reported.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».