MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392111567 · doi:10.1002/cbm.2332

The experiences of men in prison who do not receive visits from family or friends: A qualitative systematic review

2024· article· en· W4392111567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dean Burns, Conor Murray, Jennifer Ferguson, Linda Weaver Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Behaviour and Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research Council
KeywordsPrisonImprisonmentLonelinessMoodQualitative researchThematic analysisMedicineInclusion (mineral)ReferralFriendshipChecklistQualitative propertyPsychologyFamily medicinePsychiatrySocial psychologyCriminologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Behaviour and Mental HealthSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207