Criminal justice interventions for preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism: An evidence and gap map.

Background: Criminal justice agencies are well positioned to help prevent the radicalisation of individuals and groups, stop those radicalised from engaging in violence, and reduce the likelihood of terrorist attacks. This Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) presents the existing evidence and gaps in the evaluation research. Objectives: To identify the existing evidence that considers the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions in preventing radicalisation, violent extremism and terrorism. Search Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of the academic and grey literature to locate relevant studies for the EGM. Our search locations included the Global Policing Database (GPD), eight electronic platforms encompassing over 20 academic databases, five trial registries and over 30 government and non-government websites. The systematic search was carried out between 8 June 2022 and 1 August 2022. Selection Criteria: We captured criminal justice interventions published between January 2002 and December 2021 that aimed to prevent radicalisation, violent extremism, and/or terrorism. Criminal justice agencies were broadly defined to include police, courts, and corrections (both custodial and community). Eligible populations included criminal justice practitioners, places, communities or family members, victims, or individuals/groups who are radicalised or at risk of becoming radicalised. Our map includes systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, and strong quasi-experimental studies. We placed no limits on study outcomes, language, or geographic location. Data Collection and Analysis: Our screening approach differed slightly for the different sources, but all documents were assessed in the systematic review software program DistillerSR on the same final eligibility criteria. Once included, we extracted information from studies using a standardised form that allowed us to collect key data for our EGM. Eligible systematic reviews were assessed for risk of bias using the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool. Main Results: The systematic search identified 63,763 unique records. After screening, there were 70 studies eligible for the EGM (from 71 documents), of which two were systematic reviews (assessed as moderate quality), 16 were randomised controlled trials, and 52 were strong quasi-experimental studies. The majority of studies (n = 58) reported on policing interventions. Limited evidence was found related to courts or corrections interventions. The impact of these interventions was measured by a wide variety of outcomes (n = 50). These measures were thematically grouped under nine broad categories including (1) terrorism, (2) extremism or radicalisation, (3) non-terror related crime and recidivism, (4) citizen perceptions/intentions toward the criminal justice system and government, (5) psychosocial, (6) criminal justice practitioner behaviours/attitudes/beliefs, (7) racially targeted criminal justice practices, (8) investigation efficacy, and (9) organisational factors. The most commonly assessed outcomes included measures of terrorism, investigation efficacy, and organisational factors. Very limited research assessed intervention effectiveness against measures of extremism and/or radicalisation. Authors' Conclusions: Conducting high-quality evaluation research on rare and hidden problems presents a challenge for criminal justice research. The map reveals a number of significant gaps in studies evaluating criminal justice responses to terrorism and radicalisation. We conclude that future research should focus attention on studies that consolidate sound measurement of terrorism-related outcomes to better capture the potential benefits and harms of counter-terrorism programs, policies and practices which involve criminal justice agencies.

Child protection training for professionals to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect.

BACKGROUND: Many nations require child-serving professionals to report known or suspected cases of significant child abuse and neglect to statutory child protection or safeguarding authorities. Considered globally, there are millions of professionals who fulfil these roles, and many more who will do so in future. Ensuring they are trained in reporting child abuse and neglect is a key priority for nations and organisations if efforts to address violence against children are to succeed. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of training aimed at improving reporting of child abuse and neglect by professionals and to investigate possible components of effective training interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 18 other databases, and one trials register up to 4 June 2021. We also handsearched reference lists, selected journals, and websites, and circulated a request for studies to researchers via an email discussion list. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and controlled before-and-after studies examining the effects of training interventions for qualified professionals (e.g. teachers, childcare professionals, doctors, nurses, and mental health professionals) to improve reporting of child abuse and neglect, compared with no training, waitlist control, or alternative training (not related to child abuse and neglect). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used methodological procedures described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We synthesised training effects in meta-analysis where possible and summarised findings for primary outcomes (number of reported cases of child abuse and neglect, quality of reported cases, adverse events) and secondary outcomes (knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards the reporting duty). We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials (1484 participants), using data from 9 of the 11 trials in quantitative synthesis. Trials took place in high-income countries, including the USA, Canada, and the Netherlands, with qualified professionals. In 8 of the 11 trials, interventions were delivered in face-to-face workshops or seminars, and in 3 trials interventions were delivered as self-paced e-learning modules. Interventions were developed by experts and delivered by specialist facilitators, content area experts, or interdisciplinary teams. Only 3 of the 11 included studies were conducted in the past 10 years. Primary outcomes Three studies measured the number of cases of child abuse and neglect via participants' self-report of actual cases reported, three months after training. The results of one study (42 participants) favoured the intervention over waitlist, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.43; very low-certainty evidence). Three studies measured the number of cases of child abuse and neglect via participants' responses to hypothetical case vignettes immediately after training. A meta-analysis of two studies (87 participants) favoured training over no training or waitlist for training, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 1.81, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.32; very low-certainty evidence).  We identified no studies that measured the number of cases of child abuse and neglect via official records of reports made to child protection authorities, or adverse effects of training. Secondary outcomes Four studies measured professionals' knowledge of reporting duty, processes, and procedures postintervention. The results of one study (744 participants) may favour the intervention over waitlist for training (SMD 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.21; low-certainty evidence). Four studies measured professionals' knowledge of core concepts in all forms of child abuse and neglect postintervention. A meta-analysis of two studies (154 participants) favoured training over no training, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 0.68, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.01; very low-certainty evidence). Three studies measured professionals' knowledge of core concepts in child sexual abuse postintervention. A meta-analysis of these three studies (238 participants) favoured training over no training or waitlist for training, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 1.44, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.45; very low-certainty evidence). One study (25 participants) measured professionals' skill in distinguishing reportable and non-reportable cases postintervention. The results favoured the intervention over no training, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 0.94, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.77; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies measured professionals' attitudes towards the duty to report child abuse and neglect postintervention. The results of one study (741 participants) favoured the intervention over waitlist, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The studies included in this review suggest there may be evidence of improvements in training outcomes for professionals exposed to training compared with those who are not exposed. However, the evidence is very uncertain. We rated the certainty of evidence as low to very low, downgrading due to study design and reporting limitations. Our findings rest on a small number of largely older studies, confined to single professional groups. Whether similar effects would be seen for a wider range of professionals remains unknown. Considering the many professional groups with reporting duties, we strongly recommend further research to assess the effectiveness of training interventions, with a wider range of child-serving professionals. There is a need for larger trials that use appropriate methods for group allocation, and statistical methods to account for the delivery of training to professionals in workplace groups.

PROTOCOL: Criminal justice interventions for preventing terrorism and radicalisation: An evidence and gap map.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: to identify the existing evidence that considers the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions in preventing terrorism and radicalisation and to identify existing gaps in the evidence where new primary research could be undertaken and where future synthesis could be conducted.

Multiagency programs with police as a partner for reducing radicalisation to violence.

Background: Multiagency responses to reduce radicalisation often involve collaborations between police, government, nongovernment, business and/or community organisations. The complexities of radicalisation suggest it is impossible for any single agency to address the problem alone. Police-involved multiagency partnerships may disrupt pathways from radicalisation to violence by addressing multiple risk factors in a coordinated manner. Objectives: 1.Synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of police-involved multiagency interventions on radicalisation or multiagency collaboration 2.Qualitatively synthesise information about how the intervention works (mechanisms), intervention context (moderators), implementation factors and economic considerations. Search Methods: Terrorism-related terms were used to search the Global Policing Database, terrorism/counterterrorism websites and repositories, and relevant journals for published and unpublished evaluations conducted 2002-2018. The search was conducted November 2019. Expert consultation, reference harvesting and forward citation searching was conducted November 2020. Selection Criteria: Eligible studies needed to report an intervention where police partnered with at least one other agency and explicitly aimed to address terrorism, violent extremism or radicalisation. Objective 1 eligible outcomes included violent extremism, radicalisation and/or terrorism, and multiagency collaboration. Only impact evaluations using experimental or robust quasi-experimental designs were eligible. Objective 2 placed no limits on outcomes. Studies needed to report an empirical assessment of an eligible intervention and provide data on mechanisms, moderators, implementation or economic considerations. Data Collection and Analysis: The search identified 7384 records. Systematic screening identified 181 studies, of which five were eligible for Objective 1 and 26 for Objective 2. Effectiveness studies could not be meta-analysed, so were summarised and effect size data reported. Studies for Objective 2 were narratively synthesised by mechanisms, moderators, implementation, and economic considerations. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I, EPHPP, EMMIE and CASP checklists. Results: One study examined the impact on vulnerability to radicalisation, using a quasi-experimental matched comparison group design and surveys of volunteers (n = 191). Effects were small to medium and, aside from one item, favoured the intervention. Four studies examined the impact on the nature and quality of multiagency collaboration, using regression models and surveys of practitioners. Interventions included: alignment with national counterterrorism guidelines (n = 272); number of counterterrorism partnerships (n = 294); influence of, or receipt of, homeland security grants (n = 350, n = 208). Study findings were mixed. Of the 181 studies that examined mechanisms, moderators, implementation, and economic considerations, only 26 studies rigorously examined mechanisms (k = 1), moderators (k = 1), implementation factors (k = 21) or economic factors (k = 4).All included studies contained high risk of bias and/or methodological issues, substantially reducing confidence in the findings. Authors' Conclusions: A limited number of effectiveness studies were identified, and none evaluated the impact on at-risk or radicalised individuals. More investment needs to be made in robust evaluation across a broader range of interventions.Qualitative synthesis suggests that collaboration may be enhanced when partners take time to build trust and shared goals, staff are not overburdened with administration, there are strong privacy provisions for intelligence sharing, and there is ongoing support and training.

Police programmes that seek to increase community connectedness for reducing violent extremism behaviour, attitudes and beliefs.

Background: Police can play a role in tackling violent extremism through disrupting terrorist plots and by working with communities to identify individuals at risk of radicalisation. Police programmes to tackle violent extremism can involve a range of approaches and partnerships. One approach includes efforts to improve community connectedness by working to address social isolation, belonging, economic opportunities and norms and values that may lead people to endorse or support violent extremist causes and groups. The assumption is that the risk of an individual being radicalised in the community can be reduced when police work in pothe international legal ordersitive ways with community members and groups to mobilise and support activities that help generate a sense of belonging and trust. Police programmes that build a sense of belonging and trust may help ensure individuals are not influenced by activities that violent extremists use to attract support for their cause. Objectives: The review aimed to systematically examine whether or not police programmes that seek to promote community connectedness are effective in reducing violent extremist behaviours, attitudes and beliefs. The review also sought to identify whether effectiveness varied by the intervention type and location. Search Methods: Using terrorism-related terms, we searched the Global Policing Database to identify eligible published and unpublished evaluations between January 2002 and December 2018. We supplemented this with comprehensive searches of relevant terrorism and counter-terrorism websites and research repositories, reference harvesting of eligible and topic-relevant studies, forward citation searches of eligible studies, hand-searches of leading journals and consultations with experts. Selection Criteria: Eligible studies needed to include an initiative that involved the police, either through police initiation, development, leadership or where the police were receivers of the programme (such as a training programme) or where the police delivered or implemented the intervention. The initiative also needed to be some kind of a strategy, technique, approach, activity, campaign, training, programme, directive or funding/organisational change that involved police in some way to promote community connectedness. Community connectedness was defined as being community consultation, partnership or collaboration with citizens and/or organisational entities. Eligible outcomes included violent extremism, along with radicalisation and disengagement which are considered to be attitudinal and belief-based components of violent extremism. These outcomes could be measured via self-report instruments, interviews, observations and/or official data. To be included, studies could utilise individuals, micro- or macroplaces as the participants. Finally, studies needed to provide a quantitative impact evaluation that utilised a randomised or quasi-experimental design with a comparison group that either did not receive the intervention, or that received "business-as-usual" policing, no intervention or an alternative intervention. Data Collection and Analysis: The systematic search identified 2,273 records (after duplicate removal). After systematic screening across two stages (title/abstract and full-text), just one study (reported in two documents) met the review eligibility criteria. Standardised mean differences (SMD) were used to estimate intervention effects for this single study and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies-Interventions tool (ROBINS-I). Results: The single eligible study (n = 191) was a quasi-experimental evaluation of the Muslim-led intervention-World Organisation for Resource Development Education (WORDE)-conducted in the United States in 2015. The intervention comprised three components: community education, enhancing agency networks and multicultural volunteerism activities. Self-report data were collected from youth and adults who were civically engaged, sensitised to issues of violent extremism and who had existing cooperative relationships with law enforcement and social services. The comparison group comprised matched participants who had not engaged with the WORDE programme. The outcomes most closely aligned with conceptual definitions of deradicalization, specifically levels of acceptance and/or engagement with cultural and religious differences or pluralistic views and modification of group or personal identity. Based on single survey items, the SMD ranged from small to medium in favour of the treatment group aside from one item which favoured the comparison group ("I make friends with people from other races", SMD = -0.51, 95% CI: -0.82, -0.19). However, of the nine SMDs calculated, six had confidence intervals including zero. These effects should be interpreted with caution due to the study's overall serious risk of bias. It is important to note that it is not explicitly clear whether the evaluation participants in the treatment group were all directly exposed to the two intervention components that involved police. Hence, these evaluation outcomes may not be direct measures of how effect police were at countering violent extremism by promoting community connectiveness. Conclusions: The aim of this systematic review was to examine whether or not police programmes that seek to promote community connectedness are effective in reducing violent extremist behaviours, attitudes and beliefs. There is insufficient evidence available to ascertain whether such interventions achieve these outcomes. This finding is the result of the fact that interventions that have been evaluated tend to be characterised by evaluation designs that do not adopt experimental or quasi-experimental approaches or use outcomes that are outside of scope for this review. While the volume of studies identified provide support for the assertion that police can play a role in tackling violent extremism by participating in, and implementing, programmes that promote community connectedness, it is unclear at this time if such approaches work in reducing violent extremism. Whilst we conclude that investment needs to be made in more robust methods of evaluation to test for programme effectiveness, we acknowledge that conducting evaluation and research in the area of counter-terrorism/violent extremism is challenging.

PROTOCOL: Police programs that seek to increase community connectedness for reducing violent extremism behaviour, attitudes and beliefs.

Community engagement and connectedness are identified as potential mitigating factors for those at risk of engaging in violent extremism. Police have a critical role in promoting social inclusion and social connectedness and thereby preventing violent extremism. Thus, it is essential to understand the effectiveness of policing programs aimed at promoting community connectedness and their impact on reducing violent extremism. To date, there has been no systematic synthesis of the evaluation evidence for these policing approaches and their impact on violent extremism. This is the protocol for a review that will include any policing intervention that aims to promote community connectedness. The present proposed review is necessary to ascertain whether policing interventions that seek to promote community connectedness are effective for reducing violent extremism behaviour, attitudes and beliefs.