Better evidence for a better world

Campbell evidence and gap maps

Coming soon – Campbell EGMs are a new evidence synthesis product. Plain language summaries of our EGMs will be published on this website. The interactive EGMs and full EGM reports will be available in our journal on the Wiley Online Library platform: click here.



Learn more about Campbell EGMs

Other EGMs

Campbell has produced maps on other topics, sometimes in partnership with other organisations.



See our other EGMs
Better evidence for a better world
Better evidence for a better world

Better evidence for a better world (169)

Additional Info

  • Authors Clare Toon, Kurinchi Gurusamy
  • Published date 2014-05-01
  • Coordinating group(s) Crime and Justice
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2014.5
  • Records available in English, Spanish
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    Forensic nurses provide cheaper and better clinical care for rape and sexual assault complainants than doctor counterparts

    Sexual assault nurse examiners (SANE) or Forensic nurse examiners (FNE) are fully qualified nurses, trained to gather forensic evidence in rape and sexual assault cases. This review compares the reliability and efficacy of FNE/SANE health professionals with that of doctors. FNE/SANE provides cheaper services and better clinical care. However, more research is needed, as the evidence base is weak.

    What did the review study?

    In the UK incidents of rape and sexual assaults are referred to a sexual assault referral centre (SARC). These are typically headed by forensic doctors who conduct forensic examinations, collecting and documenting findings and preparing statements for court when requested by the police. In the United States, the equivalent institution for SARCs are headed by sexual assault nurse examiners (SANE).

    This review compares the reliability and efficacy of forensic nurse examiners (FNE) with that of doctors for the forensic examinations of rape and sexual assault complaints.

    What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell systematic review compares the reliability and efficacy of foreign nurse examiners/sexual assault nurse examiners with that of doctors for the forensic examinations of rape and sexual assault complaints. The review summarise findings from eight studies conducted in the USA and UK. The participants were complainants of rape or sexual assaults examined by SANE and non-SANE health professionals. A total of 2,700 participants were included in the studies with 1,223 complainants cared for by a SANE health professional and 1,477 by a non-SANE health professional.

    What studies are included?

    Included studies reported on the following outcomes using quasi-experimental trial designs: complainant quality of life, conviction and prosecution rates, complainant mortality within 30 days, time from complain to examination, provision of STI, pregnancy and HIV prophylaxis, collection and documentation of rape kits and forensic examination, number of rape kits admissible as evidence, and the average cost per price. Participants include complainants of rape or sexual assaults regardless of age or gender. The comparison group comprised of participants examined and treated by a non-SANE health professional.

    A total of 8 studies consisting of 2,700 participants were included in the final evaluation. The studies were conducted in the UK and USA.

    What are the main findings from this review?

    Treatment by forensic nurses results in better outcomes than treatment by doctors in a number of cases. Complainants receive better medical care: they are more likely to have a forensic examination (rape kit) and to have it documented, and they are more likely to receive STI and pregnancy prophylaxis than those in the non-SANE group.

    More rape kits in the SANE group were admissible as evidence in court from complainants handled by forensic nurses than doctors. However, no difference was found in conviction or prosecution rates. There was no data available on the complainant quality of life.

    Sexual assault nurse examiners are less expensive than their doctor counterparts.

    What do the findings in this review mean?

    The main results presented in this review show that FNEs/SANEs are better in terms of providing better medical care and cheaper services than doctors for the forensic examinations of rape and sexual assault complaints. However due to the limited data available to this review, the evidence-base for this conclusion is weak and as such, the evidence is insufficient to support making any significant changes to current services provided for rape and sexual assault complainants.

    The most important outcome to be considered was the quality of life of the complainants. However, there was no data available on that. Further research is thus needed to investigate the quality of life of the complainants post rape and forensic examination, both on the short and long-term. Additionally, studies evaluating the overall quality and efficiency of nurse and doctor-led services with all the outcomes listed above should be conducted on a much larger scale than to establish a stronger evidence-base.

    Finally, research is necessary to identify the barriers to the implementation of a nurse-led service for the forensic examination of complainants of rape and sexual assault, particularly in the UK.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    The review authors searched for studies published until February 2012.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

Additional Info

  • Authors Sally Simpson, Melissa Rorie, Mariel Elise Alper, Natalie Schell-Busey, William Laufer, N. Craig Smith
  • Published date 2014-05-01
  • Coordinating group(s) Crime and Justice
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2014.4
  • Records available in English, Spanish
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    Corporate crime: laws and regulations have only small effects on corporations

    Laws have a modest effect on preventing non-compliance among firms and for the geographic unit governed by the law, but not on individuals. Regulatory policy deters non-compliance among individuals but not companies. Using more than one intervention at the same time was found to have a small and consistent deterrent effect both on individuals and corporations.

    What is this review about?

    Corporate crime includes crimes committed by individual employees and those committed by institutions. Some offences are minor violations. Others are more serious and complicated, involving multiple organisations, possibly across national boundaries.

    There is a lack of high-quality studies. The limited data on corporate crime is scattered, reporting is often inconsistent, and the quality and methods of research on corporate crime varies widely.

    Criminology has focused more on street crime rather than corporate crime. This lack has made it difficult to build evidence-based policies for corporate crime prevention and control.

    The review examines the effectiveness of formal legal and administrative strategies by law enforcement agencies, legislative bodies, and regulatory bodies to lower the risk of non- compliance at both the organisational level and individual level.                

     What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell systematic review examines the effects of interventions to deter corporate crime. The review examines the effectiveness of formal legal and administrative strategies to lower the risk of non-compliance. The authors summarized 106 studies, and the interventions are grouped into six intervention categories, each with sub-categories. The intervention groups are: (1) laws, (2) punitive sanctions (e.g. arrest, fines, or a likelihood of prosecution), (3) non-punitive actions by regulatory agencies (e.g. cease and desist orders) (4) regulatory policies (e.g. company inspections), (5) other sanctions, and (6) multiple treatments.

    What studies are included?

    This systematic review summarizes data from 106 studies of corporate crime prevention and control. These studies included a wide range of experimental and non-experimental methodologies using data from a wide variety of data sources, e.g. from official agencies, corporate reports, and survey responses.

    Six treatment types were identified: (1) laws, (2) punitive sanctions such as arrest, fines, or a likelihood of prosecution, (3) non-punitive sanctions by regulatory agencies such as cease and desist orders (4) regulatory policies, e.g. company inspections, and (5) multiple treatments.

    How effective are interventions to deter non-compliance?

    Legal interventions have a small deterrent effect on company non-compliance and at the geographical level. There is not enough data to determine the effects of legal interventions on deterring individual offending.

    Regulatory interventions have a modest but consistent deterrent effect on individual offending. Their effects on deterrence at the company level were mixed.

    The use of more than one intervention at the same time was found to have a small but consistent effect on deterring non-compliance among individuals and among corporations.

    Evidence on the effects of the other interventions on non-compliance was mixed. Conclusions about their effects therefore cannot be drawn.

    Overall, the quality of evidence was low, with several contradictory findings. Older studies were more likely to find significant effects, but this may reflect weaker study designs.

    What are the research and policy implications of this review?

    Given the potentially serious impacts of corporate crime, policy makers and decision makers need to identify ways to reduce corporate crime. However, the basic findings of this review are inconclusive. There is an urgent need for high-quality empirical studies of interventions to deter and control illegal behaviours. This research can be informed by specific insights reported in this review.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    The search was completed in 2012.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

Additional Info

  • Authors Marc Winokur, Amy Holtan, Keri Batchelder
  • Published date 2014-03-03
  • Coordinating group(s) Social Welfare
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2014.2
  • Records available in English, Norwegian, Spanish, French
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    The health and well-being of children placed in kinship care is better than that of children in foster care

    The behavioural and mental health, and the well-being of children placed in kinship care is better than that of children placed in foster care. Children in kinship care experience fewer placement disruptions and incidents of institutional abuse. The likelihood that guardianship is awarded to relatives is higher for children in kinship care compared to foster care.

    There are no differences between kinship and foster care for the rates of reunification with birth parents, the length of stay in placement, children’s educational attainment, the strength of family relations or the degree to which developmental and physician services are utilised. However, children in foster care are more likely to utilise mental health services and to be adopted, which removes any involvement of their birth parents in their upbringing.

    What did the review study?

    Kinship care - the placement of children with a family related to the child - is increasingly utilised in many Western countries as an alternative to placing children who have been maltreated in residential settings or with unrelated foster families.

    This review examines the effect of kinship care compared to foster care on the safety, permanency and well-being of children removed from their home for maltreatment. Outcomes include children’s behavioural health, mental health, placement stability and permanency, educational attainment, family relations, service utilisation, and re-abuse.

    What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell systematic review examines whether kinship care is more effective than foster care in ensuring the safety, permanency and wellbeing of children removed from their home for maltreatment. The review summarizes findings from 102 studies involving 666,615 children. 71 of these studies were included in meta-analyses.

    What studies are included?

    Studies included in this review compare data on the safety, permanency and well-being of children placed in kinship care with data for children placed in foster care.

    The review includes 102 studies, all of which were controlled experimental or quasi-experimental studies: 89 of were conducted in the USA, and the remainder in Spain, the Netherlands, Norway, Ireland, UK, Israel, Sweden and Australia.

    Is kinship care more effective than foster care in ensuring the safety, permanency and well-being of children removed from their home for maltreatment?

    Children in kinship care have better behavioural and mental health than children in foster care, i.e. fewer internalising and externalising behaviours, better adaptive behaviours, fewer psychiatric disorders and better emotional health. They also experience greater stability and permanency in their placement and suffer from less institutional abuse than children in foster care. Also, the chance of relatives being awarded guardianship is greater for children in kinship care than for those in foster care.

    Children in foster care are more likely to be adopted than children in kinship care, and they utilise mental health services to a greater degree than children in kinship care.

    No differences between children in kinship and in foster care are found for the utilisation of other public services than mental health services (i.e. developmental services, or physician services), or for educational attainment, the rate of reunification with birth parents, or for the strength of their relations and attachment to their family.

    Some of the findings are context specific, notably the lesser support which may be given to kinship carers compared to foster carers, and whether permanency of the kinship or foster arrangement, adoption or reunification is the preferred end goal.

    What do the findings in this review mean?

    Kinship care is a viable option for the children that need to be removed from the home for maltreatment. However, policy issues remain to balance the cost-effectiveness of kinship care with a possible need for increased levels of caseworker involvement and service delivery.

    A considerable number of the included studies showed weaknesses in their methodologies and designs. There is a need to conduct more high quality quantitative studies of the effects of kinship care based on robust longitudinal designs and psychometrically sound instruments.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    This review includes studies published between March 2007 and March 2011.

  • Norwegian

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Norwegian.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

  • French

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in French.

Additional Info

  • Authors Steven Lawry, Cyrus Samii, Ruth Hall, Aaron Leopold, Donna Hornby, Farai Mtero
  • Published date 2014-01-02
  • Coordinating group(s) International Development
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2014.1
  • Records available in English, Spanish
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    Land property rights interventions improve agricultural productivity and investment in Latin America and Asia, but less in Africa

    Land property rights interventions increase investment, agricultural productivity and farmer incomes in Latin America and Asia but have weaker effects in Africa. But there can also be negative social outcomes such as displacing the poor and reducing women’s access to land.

    What is this review about?

    Farmers who have secure land rights can invest in long-term improvements to their farms without worrying that their land will be confiscated. Formalizing property rights may improve agricultural productivity, increase farmer income and improve access to credit.

    The most common approach to strengthening land rights in Latin America and Asia is to convert communal or non-demarcated rural land to freehold title, then register rights to the land in an official registry. In Africa, the more common approach is to demarcate and register existing customary rights. Underlying ownership remains with the state, and land sales are often restricted. This review examines the evidence on the impacts of such interventions on agricultural and livelihood outcomes in rural areas in low and middle-income countries.

    What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell Systematic Review examines the effect of interventions to strengthen land property rights on outcomes such as investment, agricultural productivity and farmer incomes in rural areas in low and middle-income countries. The review summarises evidence from 20 quantitative studies (quasi-experimental studies with statistical adjustment for bias) and nine qualitative studies.

    What studies are included?

    The review includes 20 quantitative studies with quasi-experimental study designs with statistical adjustment for bias, and nine qualitative studies. The studies were conducted in Latin America, South Asia, East Asia and Africa, and each compared households or land parcels where the interventions did and did not occur. The time between intervention and assessment ranged from two years to 44 years.

    No studies of sufficient quality were found on another kind of land property right intervention: statutory recognition of customary land rights at a legal status equal to state and private ownership, and registration of these rights in an official registry).

    What are the main findings of this review?

    What are the effects of agricultural and livelihood outcomes of land property rights interventions?

    Land property rights improve productivity, consumption expenditure and income. However, caution is needed in interpreting this finding as there are few high-quality studies available.

    Where are land property rights interventions effective?

    Land property rights interventions have significant effects in Latin America and Asia. In Africa, the effects are positive, but much weaker. Landholders in Africa may have sufficient security from customary tenure arrangements and therefore have less need for formalization. They may also have less ability to invest in their farms after gaining land rights, due to lower incomes. And tenure reforms may not be coupled adequately with investments in training, roads, or other forms of “public capital.”

    What are the other outcomes of land property rights interventions?

    Qualitative studies show that social outcomes such as displacement, conflict or gender equality are unpredictable and sometimes negative, such as displacing the poor and reducing women’s access to land.

    How has this intervention worked?

    The studies suggest that land property rights interventions contribute to welfare through improved perceived security and resulting long-term investment. No studies showed that land property rights interventions improve access to credit.

    What do the findings of this review mean?

    Land property rights interventions are promising in terms of economic outcomes but the context should be considered carefully, because benefits may not outweigh negative social consequences, especially in areas with strong existing customary land rights. More research is needed on social outcomes.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    The review authors searched for qualitative and quantitative studies published until October 2012; the search for qualitative studies was updated in July 2013. This Campbell Systematic Review was published in January 2014.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

Additional Info

  • Authors Heather Strang, Lawrence W. Sherman, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Daniel Woods, Barak Ariel
  • Published date 2013-11-04
  • Coordinating group(s) Crime and Justice
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2013.12
  • Records available in English, Norwegian, Spanish
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    Face-to-face restorative justice conferences are cost-effective in reducing reoffending and increasing victim satisfaction

    Face-to-face restorative justice conferences (RJCs) between offenders and victims have a modest but highly cost-effective impact on reoffending. Victims’ satisfaction with the handling of their cases is consistently higher among those who attend RJCs, compared to those dealt with solely by standard criminal justice processes, usually the courts.

    What is this review about?

    Restorative justice approaches attempt to repair the harms caused by a crime rather than harming the offender. This review covers face-to-face RJCs in which the offender meets the victims of the crime to discuss the offence and its consequences.

    During face-to-face RJCs participants describe how they are connected to the crime, victims describe the harm caused, and everyone – including the offender – talks about how the harm might be repaired.

    This review compares the effects of face-to-face restorative justice conferencing with standard criminal justice alone on (a) repeat offending for a two-year period after the disposal of the case and (b) measures of victim satisfaction.

    What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of face-to-face restorative justice conferences on repeat offending and victim satisfaction. The systematic review includes 10 studies.

    What studies are included?

    Included studies have all the following characteristics: (1) a randomized design to test the effects of face-to-face RJCs compared with standard criminal justice alone; (2) a report on face-to-face RJCs between at least one victim of a crime and at least one of the offenders involved; (3) provide data on the frequency of convictions or re-arrest for two years after the disposal of the case in a way which allows calculation of the effects of both treatments; and (4) published in English after 1994.

    Ten eligible studies were identified from the UK (7), Australia (2), and the USA (1). Different experiments randomly assigned cases to face-to-face RJC; some occurred at pre-trial diversion from prosecution, some occurred after conviction prior to sentencing, and others after offenders had been jailed or were on probation. The eligible studies included violent crime and property crime, as well as both youth and adult offenders.

    How effective are face-to-face RJC interventions?

    The average effect of the ten studies indicated that face-to-face RJCs resulted in offenders committing significantly less crime than their counterparts randomly assigned to standard criminal justice alone. The effect of RJCs on violent crime is larger than its effects on property crime.

    For victims, again comparing those whose cases were assigned to RJCs with those assigned to standard criminal justice, those taking part in face-to-face RJCs express higher levels of satisfaction with the handling of their cases, are more likely to receive an apology from offenders and rate these apologies as sincere, be less inclined to want to seek revenge, and suffer less from post traumatic stress symptoms.

    What are the implications of this review for policy makers and decision makers?

    Compared with standard criminal justice, usually through the courts, face-to-face RJCs reduce the frequency of subsequent crimes among offenders who are willing to take part in these programmes and whose victims are also willing to consent to RJCs.

    The effects of face-to-face RJCs on the frequency of subsequent offending are strongest when these programmes are in addition to conventional justice procedures. The use of face-to-face RJCs appears to be highly cost effective: data from the seven UK experiments indicates that the value of benefits of averted crimes is eight times the cost of delivering RJCs.

    What are the research implications of this review?

    Recruitment and retention for face-to-face RJCs among victims and offenders requires skill and more attention is needed about how to increase uptake.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    The search was completed in 2012. This Campbell systematic review was published on 1 November 2013.

  • Norwegian

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Norwegian.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

Additional Info

  • Authors Ben Parker, William Turner
  • Published date 2013-11-04
  • Coordinating group(s) Social Welfare
  • Type of document Review
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2013.13

Additional Info

  • Authors Gracia LT Fellmeth, Joanna Nurse, Catherine Heffernan, Shakiba Habibula, Dinesh Sethi
  • Published date 2013-11-04
  • Coordinating group(s) Social Welfare
  • Type of document Review
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2013.14

Additional Info

  • Authors John D. Westbrook, Carlton J. Fong, Chad Nye, Ann Williams, Oliver Wendt, Tara Cortopassi
  • Published date 2013-09-02
  • Coordinating group(s) Education
  • Type of document Review
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2013.11

Additional Info

  • Authors Patrick Tolan, David Henry, Michael Schoeny, Arin Bass, Peter Lovegrove, Emily Nichols
  • Published date 2013-09-02
  • Coordinating group(s) Crime and Justice
  • Type of document Review
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.4073/csr.2013.10

Additional Info

  • Authors Janice Tripney, Jorge Garcia Hombrados, Mark Newman, Kimberly Hovish, Chris Brown, Katarzyna T. Steinka-Fry, Eric Wilkey
  • Published date 2013-09-02
  • Coordinating group(s) Education, International Development
  • Type of document Review Plain language summary
  • Library Image Library Image
  • See the full review https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4073/csr.2013.9
  • Records available in English, Spanish
  • English

    PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

    Technical and vocational education and training for young people has a small positive effect on employment outcomes

    Youth in developing countries are three times more likely than adults to work in the informal sector in jobs with offering limited personal and social benefits. Technical and vocational education and training (TVET) are a means to expand opportunities for marginalised youth. TVET interventions have a small but positive effect on employment outcomes for young people.

    What did the review study?

    Many young people in developing countries work in low quality jobs that have low potential for career development or supporting economic growth. This is particularly problematic for developing countries given the continually significant labour productivity gap between developing and developed regions.

    With increasing emphasis on work and skills based solutions to economic completion and poverty there is a renewed focus on TVET. This review examines the effectiveness of these TVET interventions on employment and employability outcomes of young people in low and middle-income countries, and which factors may moderate these effects.

    What is the aim of this review?

    This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of technical and vocational education intervention in developing countries on employment and employability outcomes of young people. The review summarises findings from 26 studies conducted in Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, East Asia, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Participants were between the ages of 15-24. Ten studies were used for statistical meta-analysis.

    What studies are included?

    Included studies had to (1) study a TVET intervention, (2) report outcomes for youth aged 15-24 located in low-or middle-income countries; and (3) use an experimental or valid quasi-experimental research design.

    A total of 26 studies were included in the review. The studies assess the effectiveness of 20 different TVET interventions from various countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, East Asia, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. The study settings included ten upper-middle income countries–Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Latvia, Mexico, Panama and Peru; two lower-middle income countries – India and Bhutan; and one low-income country – Kenya.

    What are the main results in this review?

    Overall, TVET interventions have a small but positive effect on all but one of the employment outcomes measured.

    However, there was considerable variation in effects between studies. A main factor driving these differences was study quality. Lower quality studies find a significantly larger effect. Hence the meta-analysed effect size is inflated, and should be based on studies of at least medium quality.

    No one model of TVET intervention was found to be better than others and there was inadequate statistical power to detect moderating effects of the variables tested.

    What do the findings in this review mean?

    While the review provides some evidence of TVET interventions having positive effects on employability and employment for young people, several limitations of both the included studies and the review itself prevents one from drawing direct and strong inferences from the result of the analyses.

    So, in the absence of evidence in support of a particular, and possibly expensive, intervention, opting for the cheapest and/or most culturally acceptable models may be the best approach. At the same time, because the effects observed in this review are generally small and were difficult to detect, it is of some importance that future programmes are evaluated rigorously and that the different stakeholders involved think carefully about how to improve programmes to create larger effects on the outcomes. To build the evidence base further, many more of the TVET interventions currently in existence in developing countries need to be rigorously evaluated, and the results reported and disseminated efficiently.

    How up-to-date is this review?

    The review authors searched for studies published until September 2012. This Campbell Systematic Review was published in September 2013.

  • Spanish

    Click on 'Download PDF' on the right to view the plain language summary in Spanish.

Page 9 of 17

Contact us

  • P.O. Box 222, Skøyen,
    N-0213 Oslo, Norway
  • (+47) 21 07 81 00
  • info@campbellcollaboration.org