Preventing violence: Evaluating outcomes of parenting programmes

n/

New WHO Violence Prevention Information System, an interactive knowledge platform of scientific findings on violence.

Scientific information on violence can be difficult to compile and understand. It is scattered across websites, databases, technical reports and academic journals, and rarely addresses all types of violence. In response, in October 2017 WHO released the Violence Prevention Information System or Violence Info, an online interactive collection of scientific information about the prevalence, consequences, risk factors and preventability of all forms of interpersonal violence. It covers homicide, child maltreatment, youth violence, intimate partner violence, elder abuse and sexual violence

Violence Info methodology

The Violence Prevention Information System (Violence Info) aims to improve access to scientific information about all types of interpersonal violence, including findings on prevalence rates, risk factors, consequences, and prevention and response strategies, through creating a data repository and displaying the information in a user-friendly format on a website. This document details the methodology used to develop the Violence Info data repository and website

Parenting for Lifelong Health for young children: a randomized controlled trial of a parenting program in South Africa to prevent harsh parenting and child conduct problems

Background: Parenting programs suitable for delivery at scale in low‐resource contexts are urgently needed. We conducted a randomized trial of Parenting for Lifelong Health (PLH) for Young Children, a low‐cost 12‐session program designed to increase positive parenting and reduce harsh parenting and conduct problems in children aged 2–9. Methods: Two hundred and ninety‐six caregivers, whose children showed clinical levels of conduct problems (Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory Problem Score, >15), were randomly assigned using a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control groups. At t0, and at 4–5 months (t1) and 17 months (t2) after randomization, research assistants blind to group assignment assessed (through caregiver self‐report and structured observation) 11 primary outcomes: positive parenting, harsh parenting, and child behavior; four secondary outcomes: parenting stress, caregiver depression, poor monitoring/supervision, and social support. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02165371); Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR201402000755243); Violence Prevention Trials Register (http://www.preventviolence.info/Trials?ID=24). Results: Caregivers attended on average 8.4 sessions. After adjustment for 30 comparisons, strongest results were as follows: at t1, frequency of self‐reported positive parenting strategies (10% higher in the intervention group, p = .003), observed positive parenting (39% higher in the intervention group, p = .003), and observed positive child behavior (11% higher in the intervention group, p = .003); at t2, both observed positive parenting and observed positive child behavior were higher in the intervention group (24%, p = .003; and 17%, p = .003, respectively). Results with p‐values < .05 prior to adjustment were as follows: At t1, the intervention group self‐reported 11% fewer child problem behaviors, 20% fewer problems with implementing positive parenting strategies, and less physical and psychological discipline (28% and 14% less, respectively). There were indications that caregivers reported 20% less depression but 7% more parenting stress at t1. Group differences were nonsignificant for observed negative child behavior, and caregiver‐reported child behavior, poor monitoring or supervision, and caregiver social support. Conclusions: PLH for Young Children shows promise for increasing positive parenting and reducing harsh parenting

PROTOCOL: Digital interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in older adults: An evidence and gap map

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: the aim is to map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings

Methods for conducting systematic reviews of risk factors in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Rates of youth violence are disproportionately high in many low- and middle-income countries [LMICs] but existing reviews of risk factors focus almost exclusively on high-income countries. Different search strategies, including non-English language searches, might be required to identify relevant evidence in LMICs. This paper discusses methodological issues in systematic reviews aiming to include evidence from LMICs, using the example of a recent review of risk factors for child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs. METHODS: We searched the main international databases, such as PsycINFO, Medline and EMBASE in English, as well as 12 regional databases in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Russian. In addition, we used internet search engines and Google Scholar, and contacted over 200 researchers and organizations to identify potentially eligible studies in LMICs. RESULTS: The majority of relevant studies were identified in the mainstream databases, but additional studies were also found through regional databases, such as CNKI, Wangfang, LILACS and SciELO. Overall, 85% of eligible studies were in English, and 15% were reported in Chinese, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian or French. Among eligible studies in languages other than English, two-thirds were identified only by regional databases and one-third was also indexed in the main international databases. CONCLUSIONS: There are many studies on child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs which have not been included in prior reviews. Most research on these subjects in LMICs has been produced in the last two-three decades and mostly in middle-income countries, such as China, Brazil, Turkey, South Africa and Russia. Based on our findings, it appears that many studies of child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs are reported in English, Chinese, Spanish and Portuguese, but few such studies are published in French, Arabic or Russian. If non-English language searches and screening had not been conducted in the current review, 15% of eligible studies would have been missed. Although there are benefits to non-English language searches and the inclusion of non-English studies in meta-analyses, systematic reviewers also need to consider the resources required to incorporate multi-lingual research.We are grateful to the Wellcome Trust [089963/Z/09/Z] and Bernard van Leer Foundation for financial support for the research

PROTOCOL: In‐person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness: An evidence and gap map

Abstract This is the protocol for an evidence and gap map. The objectives are as follows: This EGM aims to map available evidence on the effects of in‐person interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness across all age groups in all settings

Attributes and definitions of locomotor capacity in older people: a World Health Organisation (WHO) locomotor capacity working group meeting report

not availabl

The impact on staff of working with personality disordered offenders: A systematic review

© 2015 Freestone et al. Background: Personality disordered offenders (PDOs) are generally considered difficult to manage and to have a negative impact on staff working with them. Aims: This study aimed to provide an overview of studies examining the impact on staff of working with PDOs, identify impact areas associated with working with PDOs, identify gaps in existing research,and direct future research efforts. Methods: The authors conducted a systematic review of the English-language literature from 1964-2014 across 20 databases in the medical and social sciences. Results: 27 papers were included in the review. Studies identified negative impacts upon staff including: negative attitudes, burnout, stress, negative counter-transferential experiences; two studies found positive impacts of job excitement and satisfaction, and the evidence related to perceived risk of violence from PDOs was equivocal. Studies demonstrated considerable heterogeneity and meta-analysis was not possible. The overall level of identified evidence was low: 23 studies (85%) were descriptive only, and only one adequately powered cohort study was found. Conclusions: The review identified a significant amount of descriptive literature, but only one cohort study and no trials or previous systematic reviews of literatures. Clinicians and managers working with PDOs should be aware of the potential impacts identified, but there is an urgent need for further research focusing on the robust evaluation of interventions to minimise harm to staff working with offenders who suffer from personality disorder Copyright