The experiences of men in prison who do not receive visits from family or friends: A qualitative systematic review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visits present an opportunity for prisoners to preserve family ties and reduce isolation, but not all receive visits from family or friends whilst incarcerated. AIMS: To locate, appraise and synthesise qualitative data on the experiences of adult male prisoners (aged 18 years+) who do not receive prison visits from family or friends. METHODS: Nine electronic databases were searched from the date of their inception until March 2023. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative studies, and data from the studies were synthesised using the thematic synthesis method. RESULTS: Eighteen studies from seven countries (the USA, the UK [England, Northern Ireland & Scotland], Canada, Netherlands and the Philippines) were eligible for inclusion. Three main themes emerged: (1) reasons for not receiving visits, (2) harmful effects of not receiving visits and (3) the value of volunteer visitor programmes. Practical problems were cited as interfering with visiting opportunities, but also some prisoners or families chose not to meet in prison. Loneliness and depression were extensively described as effects of not receiving visits. Qualities associated with volunteer visitors included raised self-esteem, improved mood and personal growth. CONCLUSION: Narratives of the experiences of adult men in prison without visits from family or friends suggest that not only the practical difficulties of imprisonment affect visiting; barriers that prisoners themselves impose would merit further exploration, as would family and relationship dynamics during incarceration and the emotional impact of prison visits, for both prisoners and their families. There are suggestions of therapeutic as well as humanitarian benefits from volunteer visiting programmes. There is a gap in the literature about any specific effect on rebuilding family relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it