Positive Youth Development Interventions: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review synthesizes current literature on the interventions promoting positive youth development (PYD) among adolescents and young adults aged 10-24 in Canada and the United States following the PYD framework. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review using electronic databases, including Medline, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature via EBSCOhost, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, focusing on randomized, quasirandomized, pretest and post-test designs studies of PYD interventions. Of the 14 studies included, most (n = 12) targeted skill-building, significantly enhancing youth's interpersonal skills, self-confidence, social engagement and empowerment. About half (n = 8) of the studies incorporated the agency domain, followed by the enabling environment domain (n = 3), and two studies (n = 2) encompassing the contribution domain. The findings emphasize PYD interventions' role in developing essential social skills in youth while highlighting the need for more rigorous, long-term studies to evaluate PYD interventions' effectiveness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".