Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.

Durham University

Department of Anthropology

Anthropology of Health Members

Publication details for Dr Nasima Akhter

Mawn, L., Oliver, E.J., Akhtar, N., Bambra, C., Torgerson, C., Bridle, C. & Stain, H.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: 16.

Author(s) from Durham

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.
Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42014007535