Are we failing young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of re-engagement interventions

Mawn, Lauren and Oliver, Emily J. and Akhter, Nasima and Bambra, Clare L. and Torgerson, Carole and Bridle, Christopher and Stain, Helen J. (2017) Are we failing young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of re-engagement interventions. Systematic Reviews, 6 (1). ISSN 2046-4053

Full content URL: http://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0394-2

Documents
Are we failing young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of re-engagement interventions
Published PDF
[img]
[Download]
[img]
Preview
PDF
25927 Mawn_et_al-2016-Systematic_Reviews.pdf - Whole Document
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.

663kB
Item Type:Article
Item Status:Live Archive

Abstract

Background
Youth comprise 40% of the world’s unemployed, a status associated with adverse wellbeing and social, health, and economic costs. This systematic review and meta-analysis review synthesises the literature on the effectiveness of interventions targeting young people not in employment, education, or training (NEET).

Methods
Randomised and quasi-randomised trials with a concurrent or counterfactual control group and baseline equivalence are included. Cochrane collaboration tools are used to assess quality, and a narrative synthesis was undertaken. The primary outcome is employment; secondary outcomes were health, earnings, welfare receipt, and education.

Results
Eighteen trials are included (9 experimental and 9 quasi-experimental), sample sizes range from 32 to 54,923. Interventions include social skills, vocational, or educational classroom-based training, counselling or one-to-one support, internships, placements, on-the-job or occupational training, financial incentives, case management, and individual support. Meta-analysis of three high-quality trials demonstrates a 4% (CI 0.0–0.7) difference between intervention and control groups on employment. Evidence for other outcomes lacks consistency; however, more intensive programmes increase employment and wages over the longer term.

Conclusions
There is some evidence that intensive multi-component interventions effectively decrease unemployment amongst NEETs. The quality of current evidence is limited, leaving policy makers under-served when designing and implementing new programmes, and a vulnerable population neglected.

Keywords:Unemployment, Effectiveness, Education, Health, Wages
Subjects:L Social studies > L410 UK Social Policy
Divisions:College of Social Science > Lincoln Institute of Health
Related URLs:
ID Code:25927
Deposited On:27 Jan 2017 12:41

Repository Staff Only: item control page