Suppr超能文献

旨在提高金融能力的干预措施:一项系统综述。

Interventions designed to improve financial capability: A systematic review.

作者信息

Birkenmaier Julie, Maynard Brandy, Kim Youngmi

机构信息

Saint Louis University School of Social Work St. Louis Missouri USA.

School of Social Work Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond Virginia USA.

出版信息

Campbell Syst Rev. 2022 Mar 14;18(1):e1225. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1225. eCollection 2022 Mar.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is growing recognition that people need stronger financial capability to avoid and recover from financial difficulties and poverty. Researchers are testing financial capability interventions with adults, children, immigrant populations and other groups, but little is known about the effectiveness of financial capability interventions on financial behaviour and financial outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review is to inform practice and policy by examining and synthesizing evidence of the effects of interventions designed to improve financial capability. Financial capability interventions combine financial education and financial products and/or services. The research questions are: (a) What are the effects of interventions designed to improve financial capability on financial behaviour and financial outcomes? and (b) Does study(design), intervention (dosage, duration, type) or sample (age) characteristics relate to the magnitude of effect size?

METHODS

We conducted two identical rounds of electronic searches for two different time periods. In Round 1 searched for studies through May, 2017 and Round 2 searched from May, 2017 through May, 2020. For both rounds, we identified and retrieved both published and unpublished studies, including conference proceedings, through a comprehensive search that included multiple electronic databases, grey literature sources, organizational websites, government websites and reference lists of reviews and relevant studies. We also conducted forward citation searching using Google Scholar to search for studies citing the included studies. We also conducted a search on Google using key terms. We hand searched the table of contents of selected journals to identify potentially eligible reports not properly indexed. Finally, experts who were study or sub-study authors of prior studies were contacted in an attempt to obtain unpublished studies, studies in process and published studies missed in the database search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

To be eligible for this review, the intervention must have included a financial education component and a financial product or service. Studies must have also been conducted in any of the 35-member countries of the OECD, and included a financial behaviour or financial outcome. To meet the criteria for delivering financial education, interventions must have delivered information about: (1) a variety of general financial concepts and behaviours, or advice about financial behaviours); (2) a specific financial topic; (3) a specific product; and/or (4) a specific service. To meet the criteria for access to a financial product or service, interventions must have facilitated access to one or more of the following: (1) a child development account; (2) a retirement account through an employer; (3) a 'second chance' checking account; (4) a matched savings account; (5) a financial service, such as financial counselling or coaching; (6) a bank account; (7) an investment vehicle; or (8) a home mortgage loan product.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Electronic searches of bibliographic databases and searches of other sources identified a total of 35,484 hits. Titles and abstracts were screened for relevance and 35,071 were excluded as duplicates or deemed inappropriate. The full text of the remaining 416 potential studies was reviewed and screened for eligibility by two independent coders. We excluded 353 reports that were deemed ineligible and included 63 reports that met inclusion criteria. Of the 63, 15 reports were deemed duplicates or summary reports. Of the remaining 48 reports, 24 were unique studies (using unique samples) that were included in this review. Six of those 24 studies were large longitudinal studies that presented unique analyses (using different time points, subsamples, and/or outcomes). Thus, we extracted data from 48 reports, reporting data and analyses from 24 unique studies. At least two review authors who were not study authors independently assessed risk of bias in all included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

The review summarizes evidence from 63 reports from 24 unique studies, which included 17 randomized controlled trials and 7 quasi-experimental designs. In addition, 17 duplicate or summary reports were also located. This review identified several different types of previously evaluated financial capability interventions. Unfortunately, few interventions that were evaluated by more than one study measured the same or similar outcomes, thus there were not a sufficient number of studies of any of the included intervention types that could be pooled to conduct a meta-analysis. Therefore, evidence is sparse about whether participants' financial behaviours and/or financial outcomes are improved. While the majority of the studies used random assignment (72%), many of the studies had some important methodological weakness.

AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of strong evidence about the effectiveness of financial capability intervention. Better evidence is needed about the effectiveness of financial capability interventions to guide practitioners.

摘要

背景

人们越来越认识到,为避免陷入财务困境并从其中恢复以及摆脱贫困,人们需要更强的财务能力。研究人员正在对成年人、儿童、移民群体及其他群体进行财务能力干预测试,但对于财务能力干预对财务行为和财务结果的有效性知之甚少。

目的

本综述的目的是通过审查和综合旨在提高财务能力的干预措施效果的证据,为实践和政策提供参考。财务能力干预措施将金融教育与金融产品和/或服务相结合。研究问题为:(a) 旨在提高财务能力的干预措施对财务行为和财务结果有何影响?(b) 研究(设计)、干预措施(剂量、持续时间、类型)或样本(年龄)特征是否与效应量大小相关?

方法

我们针对两个不同时间段进行了两轮相同的电子搜索。第一轮搜索截至2017年5月的研究,第二轮搜索从2017年5月至2020年5月的研究。对于两轮搜索,我们通过全面搜索识别并检索已发表和未发表的研究,包括会议论文集,搜索范围涵盖多个电子数据库、灰色文献来源、组织网站、政府网站以及综述和相关研究的参考文献列表。我们还使用谷歌学术进行了向前引文搜索,以查找引用纳入研究的研究。我们还使用关键词在谷歌上进行了搜索。我们手动搜索了选定期刊的目录,以识别索引不当但可能符合条件的报告。最后,我们联系了先前研究的主要作者或子研究作者等专家,试图获取未发表的研究、正在进行的研究以及数据库搜索中遗漏的已发表研究。

入选标准

要符合本综述的条件,干预措施必须包括金融教育部分以及金融产品或服务。研究还必须在经合组织35个成员国中的任何一个国家进行,并包括财务行为或财务结果。为满足提供金融教育的标准,干预措施必须提供有关以下方面的信息:(1) 各种一般金融概念和行为,或有关财务行为 的建议;(2) 特定金融主题;(3) 特定产品;和/或(4) 特定服务。为满足获得金融产品或服务的标准,干预措施必须促进获得以下一项或多项:(1) 儿童发展账户;(2) 通过雇主设立的退休账户;(3) “二次机会”支票账户;(4) 配对储蓄账户;(5) 金融服务,如金融咨询或辅导;(6) 银行账户;(7) 投资工具;或(8) 住房抵押贷款产品。

数据收集与分析

对书目数据库的电子搜索和对其他来源的搜索共识别出35484条记录。对标题和摘要进行相关性筛选,排除35071条重复或不适当的记录。由两名独立编码员对其余416项潜在研究的全文进行审查和筛选以确定是否符合条件。我们排除了353份被认为不符合条件的报告,纳入了63份符合纳入标准的报告。在这63份报告中,15份被视为重复或总结报告。在其余48份报告中,24份是独特研究(使用独特样本),纳入了本综述。这24项研究中有6项是大型纵向研究,呈现了独特的分析(使用不同时间点、子样本和/或结果)。因此,我们从48份报告中提取数据,报告了24项独特研究的数据和分析。至少两名非研究作者的综述作者使用Cochrane协作网的偏倚风险工具独立评估了所有纳入研究的偏倚风险。

结果

本综述总结了来自24项独特研究的63份报告中的证据,其中包括17项随机对照试验和7项准实验设计。此外,还找到了17份重复或总结报告。本综述确定了几种先前评估过的不同类型的财务能力干预措施。不幸的是,很少有超过一项研究评估的干预措施测量相同或相似的结果,因此没有足够数量的任何一种纳入干预类型的研究可以合并进行荟萃分析。因此,关于参与者的财务行为和/或财务结果是否得到改善的证据很少。虽然大多数研究采用了随机分配(72%),但许多研究存在一些重要的方法学弱点。

作者结论

关于财务能力干预措施的有效性缺乏有力证据。需要更好的证据来证明财务能力干预措施的有效性,以指导从业者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1512/8919701/a0f17760a068/CL2-18-e1225-g002.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验