Suppr超能文献

公共心理健康方法在网络激进化中的应用:一项空洞的系统评价。

Public Mental Health Approaches to Online Radicalisation: An Empty Systematic Review.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge Public Health, Herchel Smith Building, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SZ, UK.

Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Aug 16;20(16):6586. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20166586.

Abstract

UNLABELLED

This systematic review seeks to position online radicalisation within whole system frameworks incorporating individual, family, community and wider structural influences whilst reporting evidence of public mental health approaches for individuals engaging in radical online content.

METHODS

the authors searched Medline (via Ovid), PsycInfo (via Ebscohost) and Web of Science (Core Collection) with the use of Boolean operators across "extremism", "online content" and "intervention".

RESULTS

Following full-text assessments, all retrieved papers were excluded. No publications fulfilled the primary objective of reporting public mental health interventions specifically addressing online radicalisation. However, six publications fulfilled the secondary objective of identifying theoretical and conceptual relationships amongst elements in the three inclusion criteria (online extremism, psychological outcomes and intervention strategy) that could inform interventions within public mental health frameworks. These publications were quality assessed and discussed following the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care guide for reporting empty reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

there is an immediate need for further research in this field given the increase in different factions of radicalised beliefs resulting from online, particularly social media, usage.

摘要

未加标签

本系统评价旨在将在线激进化置于包含个体、家庭、社区和更广泛结构影响的整体系统框架内,同时报告针对参与激进在线内容的个人的公共心理健康方法的证据。

方法

作者使用布尔运算符在“极端主义”、“在线内容”和“干预”之间搜索 Medline(通过 Ovid)、PsycInfo(通过 Ebscohost)和 Web of Science(核心合集)。

结果

经过全文评估,所有检索到的论文均被排除在外。没有出版物完全符合专门针对在线激进化报告公共心理健康干预措施的主要目标。然而,有六篇出版物满足了次要目标,即确定三个纳入标准(在线极端主义、心理结果和干预策略)中要素之间的理论和概念关系,这些关系可以为公共心理健康框架内的干预措施提供信息。这些出版物根据 Cochrane 有效实践和组织护理指南进行了质量评估,并在报告空评论时进行了讨论。

结论

鉴于在线(特别是社交媒体)使用导致不同派别的激进信仰增加,该领域急需进一步研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ef78/10454252/b38a4380b97d/ijerph-20-06586-g001.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