1
|
Contextualising Youth Justice Interventions: Making the Case for Realist Synthesis. SUSTAINABILITY 2022. [DOI: 10.3390/su14020854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
This article examines the problematic reductionism and decontextualising nature of hegemonic youth justice intervention evaluation and offers a way ahead for a realistic, context-sensitive approach to intervention evaluation in the youth justice field. It opens by considering how the development of risk-based youth justice interventions in England and Wales flowed from and fed into the modernisation and resultant partiality of the ‘evidence-base’, which shaped youth justice practice. It then moves to a critical review of the emergence and continued influence of risk-based interventions and the ‘What Works’ intervention evaluation framework in youth justice. In the closing discussion, this article envisages the potential of taking a realist approach to the evaluation of youth justice interventions to mitigate the limitations of current approaches to intervention selection and the evaluation of their ‘effectiveness’.
Collapse
|
2
|
Kouyoumdjian FG, Lamarche L, McCormack D, Rowe J, Kiefer L, Kroch A, Antoniou T. 90-90-90 for everyone?: Access to HIV care and treatment for people with HIV who experience imprisonment in Ontario, Canada. AIDS Care 2019; 32:1168-1176. [PMID: 31615271 DOI: 10.1080/09540121.2019.1679710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
We examined HIV care and treatment in prison and after release for people with HIV in Ontario, Canada, and compared HIV care and treatment with the general population. We used administrative data to identify people with HIV released from provincial prison in 2010 and in the general population. We calculated the proportion of people with HIV who accessed HIV care in prison. We compared HIV care use between people with HIV on prison release and in the general population. We estimated the proportion of people with HIV on antiretroviral therapy in prison as the ratio of the average numbers of people prescribed antiretroviral therapy in prison in 2009/2010 and people with HIV in prison in January 2010. We compared the proportion of people with HIV on public drug benefits that filled an antiretroviral therapy prescription within 6 months for people postrelease and in the general population. Of 344 people with HIV on prison admission, 34.0% received HIV care in prison. Over 1 year, 63.6% of 330 people with HIV on prison release and 67.7% of 15,819 people with HIV in the general population accessed HIV care (p = 0.118), and 43.3% of people with HIV on prison release and 55.2% of people with HIV in the general population had 2 or more HIV care visits (p < 0.001). In prison, 52.4% of people with HIV (39.5/75.4) were on antiretroviral therapy. Of those accessing drug benefits, 60.1% of 226 people with HIV on prison release and 79.6% of 7458 people with HIV in the general population claimed an antiretroviral therapy prescription within 6 months (p < 0.001). Access to HIV care and treatment were suboptimal in prison, and sustained HIV care and treatment were worse for people post-release compared to the general population. Interventions are needed to support HIV care for this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona G Kouyoumdjian
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Larkin Lamarche
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Lori Kiefer
- Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Tony Antoniou
- ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|