Suchergebnisse

Research into press reporting on young people has tended to concentrate on young people as offenders. In contrast, this article focuses on press coverage of teenagers as victims. Reports in two Swedish newspapers (a morning broadsheet and an evening tabloid) were studied over a period of four months and subjected to a qualitative analysis of discourse on teenagers as victims of various forms of violence and ill‐treatment. It was found that danger and threats to the teenagers were seen as gendered, and as emanating from their own age group and from outside the home and family. The class background of the victims was not salient and child welfare issues were seldom mentioned. Copyright © 2006 The Author(s). Journal compilation © National Children's Bureau.

Research indicates that a number of psychosocial interventions are effective for reducing behavioural problems in youth. These interventions are now often included on best practice lists aiming to facilitate informed treatment choices among practitioners. However, analyses in neighbouring research areas have highlighted serious shortcomings in how primary studies are analysed and how studies are synthesised in research reviews. This study took a closer look at the evidence of efficacy for psychosocial interventions that aim to reduce behavioural problems in youth, as shown in systematic research reviews by the Cochrane and the Campbell Collaborations (n = 8). The findings suggest a bias towards overemphasising the efficacy of the interventions in several reviews, an over‐confidence in the validity of the findings in some reviews and, overall, a somewhat uncertain evidence base for the efficacy of the interventions. Systematic reviews are crucial for summarising research but more attention to methodological issues may be needed in this area.

We explore how four evidence-producing organisations in the US go ahead when they rate the evidence base for psychosocial interventions, using the Incredible Years programme as our case study. The findings demonstrate variation in the procedures and resulting evidence claims across the organisations, with some organisations being strict and some being permissive. The presence of such conflicting practices highlights central challenges for the evidence-based practice framework and its ambition of obtaining uniform evidence statements. We conclude that practitioners and policy makers should be aware of such variation in order to be able to make informed decisions regarding which programmes to use.

The field of residential care for children and youth in Sweden is often termed unstable and turbulent. During recent decades the field has been subject to many changes. In this study, the development and changes in the field of residential care for children and youth in terms of ownership structure and treatment ideas will be analysed. The study is particularly focused on the changes in ownership structure that have taken place during the 2010s. It also analyses changes in treatment ideas, and discusses how these may relate to transformations of ownership structures as well as to dimensions of institutional logics, such as legislation and other types of normative pressure from the environment. The result reveals that of the approximately 450 treatment oriented residential care units (excluding homes for refugee children), close to 80 % are today run by private companies and to a growing extent by large for-profit corporations. Parallel – and possibly related – to the changes in ownership structure, the dominant treatment ideas have changed over time. The changes in the field can be summarised as a transformation from small-scale establishments with a family logic, to large-scale establishments with a professional logic, or more specifically from a domination of small family run units with milieu therapy to big business and a focus on evidence based interventions.