BACKGROUND 3 1.1 Description of the condition 1.2 Description of the intervention 1.3 How the intervention might work 1.4 Why it is important to do this review 2 OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW 13 3 METHODS 14 3.1 Criteria for considering studies for this review 3.2 Search methods for identification of studies 3.3 Data collection and analysis 3.4 Data synthesis 4 REFERENCES 29 5 APPENDICES 38 5.1 Study elilgibility screening level one & two 5.2 Data extraction 5.3 Assessment of risk of bias in included studies: Guidelines 5.4 Assesment of risk of bias for included studies: coding sheet 6 CONTRIBUTION OF AUTHORS 62 7 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 63 8 SOURCES OF SUPPORT 64 8.1 Internal sources 8.2 External sources 3 1 Background 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE CONDITION Youth drug use 1 that persists beyond curious experimentation is a severe problem worldwide (United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2010). Use of non-opioids drugs such as cannabis, amphetamine and cocaine is strongly associated with a range of health and social problems, including delinquency, poor scholastic attainment, fatal automobile accidents, suicide and other individual and public calamities

No abstract

The Campbell Collaboration was founded on the principle that systematic reviews on the effects of interventions will inform and help improve policy and services. Campbell offers editorial and methodological support to review authors throughout the process of producing a systematic review. A number of Campbell's editors, librarians, methodologists and external peer reviewers contribute. Plain language summaryInterventions to reduce homelessness and improve housing stability are effectiveThere are large numbers of homeless people around the world. Interventions to address homelessness seem to be effective, though better quality evidence is required. What is this review about?There are large numbers of homeless people around the world. Recent estimates are over 500,000 people in the USA, 100,000 in Australia and 30,000 in Sweden. Efforts to combat homelessness have been made on national levels as well as at local government levels.This review assesses the effectiveness of interventions combining housing and case management as a means to reduce homelessness and increase residential stability for individuals who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. What is the aim of this review?This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of interventions to reduce homelessness and increase residential stability for individuals who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. Forty-three studies were included in the review, 37 of which are from the USA. What studies are included?Included studies were randomized controlled trials of interventions for individuals who were already, or at-risk of becoming, homeless, and which measured impact on homelessness or housing stability with follow-up of at least one year.A total of 43 studies were included. The majority of the studies (37) were conducted in the United States, with three from the United Kingdom and one each from Australia, Canada, and Denmark. 6The Campbell Collaboration | www.campbellcollaboration.org What are the main findings of this review?Included interventions perform better than the usual services at reducing homelessness or improving housing stability in all comparisons. These interventions are: These interventions seem to have similar beneficial effects, so it is unclear which of these is best with respect to reducing homelessness and increasing housing stability. What do the findings of this review mean?A range of housing programs and case management interventions appear to reduce homelessness and improve housing stability, compared to usual services.However, there is uncertainty in this finding as most the studies have risk of bias due to poor reporting, lack of blinding, or poor randomization or allocation concealment of participants. In addition to the general need for better conducted and reported studies, there are specific gaps in the research with respect to: 1) disadvantaged youth; 2) abstinence-contingent housing with case management or day treatment; 3) non-abstinence contingent housing comparing group vs independent living; 4) Hous...

BACKGROUND 4 1.1 Description of the condition 1.2 Description of the intervention 1.3 How the intervention might work 1.4 Why it is important to do this review 2 OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW 16 3 METHODS 17 3.1 Criteria for considering studies for this review 3.2 Search methods for identification of studies 3.3 Data collection and analysis 3.4 Data synthesis 4 REFERENCES 32 5 APPENDICES 39 5.1 Study eligibility screening level one & two 5.2 Data extraction 5.3 Assessment of risk of bias in included studies: Guidelines 5.4 Assessment of risk of bias: Coding Sheet 6 CONTRIBUTION OF AUTHORS 60 7 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 61 8 SOURCES OF SUPPORT 62 8.1 Internal sources 8.2 External sources 4 1 Background 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE CONDITION Youth drug use 1 that persists beyond curious experimentation is a severe problem worldwide (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2010). Use of non-opioids drugs such as cannabis, amphetamine and cocaine is strongly associated with a range of health and social problems, including delinquency, poor scholastic attainment, fatal automobile accidents, suicide and other individual and public calamities