This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (prototype). The objectives are as follows: This systematic review aims to summarize the available scientific literature on the effect of mindfulness‐based approaches in children and adults with Chronic Tic Disorder (CTD) or Tourette Disorder (TD). More specifically, the research question is: What is the effectiveness of mindfulness‐based interventions in reducing tic severity and improving overall functioning, quality of life, and co‐occurring symptoms in children and adults with CTD or TD?

The results of the included studies were difficult to synthesize because of the heterogeneity in the reported outcomes. This was due in part to poverty being multidimensional, so outcomes covered various aspects of life (economic, social, psychological, educational, agency, mental and physical health). Evidence from future studies would be easier to assess if outcomes were measured using more common, validated instruments. Based on our analysis of the included studies, a supplemental type of GBI (provided along with existing programs) may be effective in alleviating poverty-related outcomes. This approach may also be safer than a wholesale reform of existing social assistance approaches, which could have unintended consequences.

Various shared features among different summer education programmes emerged from the review, allowing us to cluster specific types of these interventions which then aided the structuring of the thematic synthesis. The three distinct clusters for summer education programmes were: catch-up programmes addressing attainment gaps, raising aspirations programmes inspiring young people to pursue the next stage of their education or career, and transition support programmes facilitating smooth transitions between educational levels. Depending on their aim, summer education programme tend to provide a combination of: additional instruction on core subjects (e.g., English, mathematics); academic classes including to enhance specialist subject knowledge (e.g., STEM-related); homework help; coaching and mentoring; arts and recreation electives; and social and enrichment activities. Summer employment programmes provide paid work placements or subsidised jobs typically in entry-level roles mostly in the third and public sectors, with some summer employment programmes also providing placements in the private sector. They usually include components of pre-work training and employability skills, coaching and mentoring. There are a number of mechanisms which act as facilitators or barriers to engagement in summer programmes. These include tailoring the summer programme to each young person and individualised attention; the presence of well-prepared staff who provide effective academic/workplace and socio-emotional support; incentives of a monetary (e.g., stipends and wages) or non-monetary (e.g., free transport and meals) nature; recruitment strategies, which are effective at identifying, targeting and engaging participants who can most benefit from the intervention; partnerships, with key actors who can help facilitate referrals and recruitment, such as schools, community action and workforce development agencies; format, including providing social activities and opportunities to support the formation of connections with peers; integration into the workplace, through pre-placement engagement, such as through orientation days, pre-work skills training, job fairs, and interactions with employers ahead of the beginning of the summer programme; and skill acquisition, such as improvements in social skills. In terms of the causal processes which lead from engagement in a summer programme to outcomes, these include: skill acquisition, including academic, social, emotional, and life skills; positive relationships with peers, including with older students as mentors in summer education programmes; personalised and positive relationships with staff; location, including accessibility and creating familiar environments; creating connections between the summer education programme and the students' learning at home to maintain continuity and reinforce learning; and providing purposeful and meaningful work through summer employment programmes (potentially facilitated through the provision of financial and/or non-financial incentives), which makes participants more likely to see the importance of education in achieving their life goals and this leads to raised aspirations. It is important to note that no single element of a summer programme can be identified as generating the causal process for impact, and impact results rather from a combination of elements. Finally, we investigated strengths and weaknesses in summer programmes at both the design and implementation stages. In summer education programmes, design strengths include interactive and alternative learning modes; iterative and progressive content building; incorporating confidence building activities; careful lesson planning; and teacher support which is tailored to each student. Design weaknesses include insufficient funding or poor funding governance (e.g., delays to funding); limited reach of the target population; and inadequate allocation of teacher and pupil groups (i.e., misalignment between the education stage of the pupils and the content taught by staff). Implementation strengths include clear programme delivery guidance and good governance; high quality academic instruction; mentoring support; and strong partnerships. Implementation weaknesses include insufficient planning and lead in time; recruitment challenges; and variability in teaching quality. In summer employment programmes, design strengths include use of employer orientation materials and supervisor handbooks; careful consideration of programme staff roles; a wide range of job opportunities; and building a network of engaged employers. Design weaknesses are uncertainty over funding and budget agreements; variation in delivery and quality of training between providers; challenges in recruitment of employers; and caseload size and management. Implementation strengths include effective job matching; supportive relationships with supervisors; pre-work training; and mitigating attrition (e.g., striving to increase take up of the intervention among the treatment group). Implementation weaknesses are insufficient monitors for the number of participants, and challenges around employer availability.

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta‐analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta‐analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies' methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re‐analysis.

Evidence and gap maps (EGMs) are an increasinly popular approach used in evidence synthesis. As an approach they address broad research questions, describing the existing evidence base, highlighting evidence gaps and providing an interactive visual tool for knowledge users. The purpose of this methodological study is to explore the the processes used in the development of EGM's and how they are reported. The aim is to better understand current practice and identify where clearer guidance is needed to support their production.

We reviewed evidence from 36 trials conducted among youth. According to our meta-analyses, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of apps on depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and alcohol use. Very few effects were interpreted to be of clinical importance. Most of the RCTs were small studies focusing on efficacy for youth at risk for depressive symptoms. Larger trials are needed to evaluate effectiveness and allow for further analysis of subgroup differences. Longer trials are also needed to better estimate the clinical importance of these apps over the long term.

This is the protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows: The aim of this systematic review is to advance our understanding of the key characteristics of effective preschool‐based interventions designed to foster self‐regulation. To accomplish this, the review addresses the following questions: 1. What types of preschool‐based interventions have been developed to promote self‐regulation? 2. What is the average effect of these preschool‐based interventions on self‐regulation, focusing on four key constructs: integrative effortful control, integrative executive function, self‐regulation, and self‐regulated learning? 3. What characteristics—such as Resource Allocation, Activity Type, and Instruction Method—could potentially contribute to the effects of preschool‐based interventions in promoting self‐regulation?

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review. The objectives are as follows. This paper aims to describe a protocol for a systematic review that will synthesise the qualitative evidence regarding factors influencing the implementation of non‐pharmacological interventions (NPIs) for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) management in residential aged care homes (RACHs). The planned systematic review aims to answer the research question: ‘What are the factors influencing the implementation of NPIs in the management of BPSD at RACHs?’. Additionally, the planned systematic review also aims to generate recommendations to guide stakeholders (e.g., clinicians and aged care staff) and policymakers in the implementation of NPIs for managing BPSD at RACHs.

BackgroundYoung people who enter the justice system experience complex health and social needs, and offending behaviour is increasingly recognised as a public health problem. Arts interventions can be used with the aim of preventing or reducing offending or reoffending.Objectives1. To evaluate evidence on the effectiveness and impact of arts interventions on keeping children and young people safe from involvement in violence and crime. 2. To explore factors impacting the implementation of arts interventions, and barriers and facilitators to participation and achievement of intended outcomes. 3. To develop a logic model of the processes by which arts interventions might work in preventing offending behaviours.Search MethodsWe searched AMED, Academic Search Complete; APA PsycInfo; CINAHL Plus; ERIC; SocIndex; SportDiscus, Medline, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, PTSDPubs and Performing Arts Periodicals Database, Sage, the US National Criminal Justice Reference Service, the Global Policing and British Library EThOS databases, and the National Police Library from inception to January 2023 without language restrictions.Selection CriteriaWe included randomised and non‐randomised controlled trials and quasi‐experimental study designs. We included qualitative studies conducted alongside intervention trials investigating experiences and perceptions of participants, and offering insight into the barriers and facilitators to delivering and receiving arts interventions. We included qualitative and mixed methods studies focused on delivery of arts interventions. We included studies from any global setting. We included studies with CYP (8–25 years) who were identified as at‐risk of offending behaviour (secondary populations) or already in the criminal justice system (tertiary populations). We included studies of interventions involving arts participation as an intervention on its own or alongside other interventions. Primary outcomes were: (i) offending behaviour and (ii) anti‐pro‐social behaviours. Secondary outcomes were: participation/attendance at arts interventions, educational attainment, school attendance and engagement and exclusions, workplace engagement, wellbeing, costs and associated economic outcomes and adverse events.Data Collection and AnalysisWe included 43 studies (3 quantitative, 38 qualitative and 2 mixed methods). We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We used GRADE and GRADE CERQual to assess the certainty of and confidence in the evidence for quantitative and qualitative data respectively.Main ResultsWe found insufficient evidence from quantitative studies to support or refute the effectiveness of arts interventions for CYP at‐risk of or who have offended for any outcome. Qualitative evidence suggested that arts interventions may lead to positive emotions, the development of a sense of self, successful engagement in creative practices, and development of positive personal relationships. Arts interventions may need accessible and flexible delivery and are likely to be engaging if they have support from staff, family and community members, are delivered by professional artists, involve culturally relevant activity, a youth focus, regularity and a sustainable strategy. We found limited evidence that a lack of advocacy, low funding, insufficient wider support from key personnel in adjacent services could act as barriers to success. Methodological limitations resulted in a judgement of very low confidence in these findings.Authors' ConclusionsWe found insufficient evidence from quantitative studies to support or refute the effectiveness of arts interventions for CYP at‐risk of offending or who have offended for any outcome. We report very low confidence about the evidence for understanding the processes influencing the successful design and delivery of arts interventions in this population of CYP and their impact on behavioural, psychosocial, cognitive and offending outcomes.