• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估社区暴力干预项目:一项综合方法与措施的范围综述

Evaluating Community Violence Intervention Programs: A Scoping Review Synthesizing Methods and Measures.

作者信息

Girma Meron, Schleimer Julia, Aveledo Astrid, Mustafa Ayah, Rencken Camerin, Thurston Carolyn, Nehra Deepika, Torset Kris, Jones Kristian, Johnson Laura, Polansky Lauren, McCollum Olivia, Ames Orlando, Ross Rachel, Decker Sam, Taylor Stephanie, Harrison Tarrell, Lyons Vivian, Lynch Zaheed, Rowhani-Rahbar Ali

机构信息

University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Dispute Resolution Center of Grays Harbor and Pacific Counties, Aberdeen, WA, USA.

出版信息

Inquiry. 2025 Jan-Dec;62:469580251361742. doi: 10.1177/00469580251361742. Epub 2025 Aug 8.

DOI:10.1177/00469580251361742
PMID:40776794
Abstract

Community violence intervention (CVI) is a promising strategy to reduce community violence, but research on CVI programs remains underdeveloped. While prior reviews have examined the effectiveness of certain CVI models, we lack a comprehensive synthesis of how CVI research is done and what measures are used. We conducted a scoping review of CVI evaluation measures and methods in the United States, reviewing both peer-reviewed and gray literature from 1996 through 2023. We summarized characteristics of CVI program evaluations, including evaluation measures used, units of analysis, and involvement of external partners-including community members-in the evaluation. Of 1763 articles screened, 149 were included. A plurality of studies examined both outcome and process measures (38.9%), and use of process measures increased over time. Most outcome evaluations used only deficit-based measures (76.4%), with variation across CVI model/approach. Authors of studies included in this review reported that CVI practitioners contributed to evaluations in various ways, but only 10.7% of evaluations included CVI practitioners as authors. Process measures were most often collected at the individual level (84.2%), while outcome measures were collected relatively equally at the individual (56.6%) and community level (53.8%) though with notable variation across CVI models/approaches. Community partners working in CVI were part of our authorship team and offered critical insights into interpreting the findings from this scoping review. Findings underscore the need for a more comprehensive approach to CVI evaluation. By including process and outcome measures, including community-level units of analysis in addition to the typical individual-level ones, employing asset-based frameworks, and actively involving community voices, future research can more effectively assess the implementation and impacts of CVI programs.

摘要

社区暴力干预(CVI)是一种很有前景的减少社区暴力的策略,但关于CVI项目的研究仍不发达。虽然之前的综述研究了某些CVI模式的有效性,但我们缺乏对CVI研究方法以及所采用测量方法的全面综合分析。我们对美国CVI评估措施和方法进行了一项范围综述,回顾了1996年至2023年的同行评审文献和灰色文献。我们总结了CVI项目评估的特征,包括所使用的评估措施、分析单位以及外部合作伙伴(包括社区成员)在评估中的参与情况。在筛选的1763篇文章中,有149篇被纳入。多项研究同时考察了结果和过程测量指标(38.9%),并且过程测量指标的使用随着时间有所增加。大多数结果评估仅使用基于缺陷的测量指标(76.4%),不同CVI模式/方法之间存在差异。本综述纳入研究的作者报告称,CVI从业者以各种方式为评估做出了贡献,但只有10.7%的评估将CVI从业者列为作者。过程测量指标大多在个体层面收集(84.2%),而结果测量指标在个体层面(56.6%)和社区层面(53.8%)的收集比例相对均衡,不过不同CVI模式/方法之间存在显著差异。从事CVI工作的社区合作伙伴是我们作者团队的一部分,并为解读本范围综述的结果提供了关键见解。研究结果强调了对CVI评估采用更全面方法的必要性。通过纳入过程和结果测量指标,除了典型地在个体层面外还纳入社区层面的分析单位,采用基于资产的框架,并积极纳入社区意见,未来的研究可以更有效地评估CVI项目的实施情况和影响。

相似文献

1
Evaluating Community Violence Intervention Programs: A Scoping Review Synthesizing Methods and Measures.评估社区暴力干预项目:一项综合方法与措施的范围综述
Inquiry. 2025 Jan-Dec;62:469580251361742. doi: 10.1177/00469580251361742. Epub 2025 Aug 8.
2
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
3
Behavioral interventions to reduce risk for sexual transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men.降低男男性行为者中艾滋病毒性传播风险的行为干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16(3):CD001230. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001230.pub2.
4
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.性虐待和暴力的心理社会干预的幸存者、家庭和专业人员的经验:定性证据综合。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 4;10(10):CD013648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013648.pub2.
5
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.心理健康问题的居家治疗:一项系统综述
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.
6
The quantity, quality and findings of network meta-analyses evaluating the effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs for weight loss: a scoping review.评估胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP-1 RAs)减肥效果的网状Meta分析的数量、质量及结果:一项范围综述
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Jun 25:1-73. doi: 10.3310/SKHT8119.
7
The Lived Experience of Autistic Adults in Employment: A Systematic Search and Synthesis.成年自闭症患者的就业生活经历:系统检索与综述
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Dec 2;6(4):495-509. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0114. eCollection 2024 Dec.
8
How Are Qualitative Methods Used in Implementation Science Research? Results From a Systematic Scoping Review.定性方法如何用于实施科学研究?一项系统综述的结果
Implement Res Pract. 2025 Aug 28;6:26334895251367470. doi: 10.1177/26334895251367470. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
9
What Helps or Hinders Annual Wellness Visits for Detection and Management of Cognitive Impairment Among Older Adults? A Scoping Review Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.哪些因素有助于或阻碍老年人进行年度健康检查以检测和管理认知障碍?一项以实施研究综合框架为指导的范围综述
Nurs Rep. 2025 Aug 12;15(8):295. doi: 10.3390/nursrep15080295.
10
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.

本文引用的文献

1
CDC Program Evaluation Framework, 2024.美国疾病预防控制中心计划评估框架,2024 年。
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2024 Sep 26;73(6):1-37. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.rr7306a1.
2
Predicting and Preventing Gun Violence: An Experimental Evaluation of READI Chicago.预测与预防枪支暴力:对芝加哥“READY”计划的实验性评估
Q J Econ. 2024 Feb;139(1):1-56. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjad031. Epub 2023 Jul 6.
3
The gap between hospital-based violence intervention services and client needs: A systematic review.基于医院的暴力干预服务与客户需求之间的差距:系统评价。
Surgery. 2023 Oct;174(4):1008-1020. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.07.011. Epub 2023 Aug 14.
4
Voicing narratives of structural violence in interpersonal firearm violence research and prevention in the United States.在美国人际枪支暴力研究和预防中表达结构性暴力的叙事。
Front Public Health. 2023 Jun 2;11:1143278. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1143278. eCollection 2023.
5
Relationships, resources, and political empowerment: community violence intervention strategies that contest the logics of policing and incarceration.关系、资源和政治赋权:社区暴力干预策略,挑战警务和监禁的逻辑。
Front Public Health. 2023 Apr 17;11:1143516. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1143516. eCollection 2023.
6
Focused deterrence strategies effects on crime: A systematic review.重点威慑策略对犯罪的影响:一项系统综述。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2019 Sep 9;15(3):e1051. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1051. eCollection 2019 Sep.
7
Using synthetic control methodology to estimate effects of a intervention in Baltimore, Maryland.采用合成控制法估计马里兰州巴尔的摩市干预措施的效果。
Inj Prev. 2022 Feb;28(1):61-67. doi: 10.1136/injuryprev-2020-044056. Epub 2021 Feb 8.
8
Firearm and Nonfirearm Violence After Operation Peacemaker Fellowship in Richmond, California, 1996-2016.1996-2016 年加利福尼亚州里士满“和平缔造者”研究员项目后枪支暴力和非枪支暴力
Am J Public Health. 2019 Nov;109(11):1605-1611. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305288. Epub 2019 Sep 19.
9
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.PRISMA 扩展用于范围审查 (PRISMA-ScR): 清单和解释。
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
10
A systematic meta-review of evaluations of youth violence prevention programs: Common and divergent findings from 25 years of meta-analyses and systematic reviews.青少年暴力预防项目评估的系统元综述:25年荟萃分析和系统评价的共同与不同发现
Aggress Violent Behav. 2012 Nov-Dec;17(6):540-552. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.006.