A scoping review of evaluated interventions addressing developmental transitions for youth with mental health disorders.

BACKGROUND: Youth with mental health disorders often experience challenges when transitioning into adult roles (e.g. independent living, work and community engagement). Health interventions that address the needs of youth with mental health disorders during these challenges in their development (i.e. developmental transitions) have not been reviewed in the literature. This scoping review examines the peer-reviewed research that describes evaluated interventions addressing developmental transitions for youth with mental health disorders. METHODS: A search of four prominent health literature databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO) was conducted to identify evaluated developmental transition interventions for adolescents and youth (12-25 years) with mental health disorders. Study selection and analysis were guided by a methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews. Selected studies were described, assessed for quality and collated based on ten dimensions from two notable conceptual frameworks in developmental transitions and disability. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. The interventions within these studies demonstrated five specialized and four multi-faceted programmes (i.e. multiple domains). All domains from the two conceptual frameworks were represented differently across studies. The sub-domains from these studies were most frequently related to vocational-focused interventions, least frequently related to social activities and living situation and did not explicitly map onto the sexuality sub-domain. Three multi-faceted interventions incorporated all domains and utilized each intervention approach. Study quality was rated for seven of the nine studies. Quantitative methodology for five of the seven studies was rated as higher quality. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluated interventions described in the transitions literature for youth with mental health disorders predominantly focus on vocational needs. The least studied areas were the personal and interpersonal domains. These domains were only incorporated within interventions addressing multiple domains of developmental transitions. These insights can be helpful in guiding evidence-based practice and policy development, as well as informing gaps for future research programmes.

Social determinants of health and health equity policy research: exploring the use, misuse, and nonuse of policy analysis theory.

Despite a dramatic growth in SDH/HE (social determinants of health/health equity) public policy research and demonstrated government interest in promoting equity in health policies, health inequities are actually growing among some populations and there is little evidence that "healthy public policies" are being adopted and implemented. Moreover, these issues are typically failing to even reach governments' policy agendas, which is a critical step towards serious debate and the identification of policy options. This systematic review pursues three main objectives. First, is to identify barriers to SDH/HE issues reaching the government policy agenda. Second, to evaluate the characteristics of peer-reviewed research articles that utilize common policy analysis theories. And third, to determine the extent to which the SDH/HE literature utilizes common policy analysis theories. Our systematic review, conducted in June 2012, identified 6200 SDH/HE related articles in the peer-reviewed literature; however, only seven articles explicitly used a commonly recognized policy analysis theory to inform their analysis. Our analysis revealed that the SDH/HE policy literature appears to be focused on advocacy rather than analysis and that the use of policy analysis theory is extremely limited. Our results also suggest that when such theories are incorporated into an analysis they are often not comprehensively employed. We propose explanations for this non-use and misuse of policy analysis theory, and conclude that researchers may have greater influence in helping to get SDH/HE issues onto government policy agendas if they gain a greater understanding of the policy process and the value of incorporating policy analysis theories into their research. Using a policy analysis lens to help identify why healthy public policies are typically not being adopted is an important step towards moving beyond advocacy to understanding and addressing some of the political barriers to reforms.