IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0325409.html

Mapping the evidence on outcomes of childhood out-of-home care: A scoping review of reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Richmond Opoku
  • Natasha Judd
  • Katie Cresswell
  • Michael Parker
  • Michaela James
  • Jonathan Scourfield
  • Karen Hughes
  • Jane Noyes
  • Dan Bristow
  • Evangelos Kontopantelis
  • Sinead Brophy
  • Natasha Kennedy

Abstract

Background: Children placed in out-of-home care in high-income countries face complex challenges due to exposure to adverse childhood experiences and systemic disadvantages. While research on their outcomes has grown, the evidence base remains fragmented. An overview of review-level evidence was conducted to identify patterns, gaps, and priorities for future research and practice. Methods: A scoping review of reviews was conducted. Peer-reviewed review articles published between January 2013 and July 2024 were identified through searches in databases including EBSCOhost, ProQuest, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Epistemonikos. Eligible reviews focused on childhood out-of-home care experience and reported outcomes for care-experienced individuals (assessed either in childhood or adulthood) and/or associated factors. Outcomes were categorised under the following domains: Health and Emotional Wellbeing (HEW), Physical and Legal Security (PLS), Education and Learning (EL), Living Standards and Social Wellness (LSSW), and Identity and Civic Participation (ICP). Factors were classified across multiple levels, including individual child-level, socio-relational-level, community-level, system-level, and other factors. Results: A total of 77 reviews were included, spanning diverse methodologies and contexts. Research was concentrated in domains such as HEW and LSSW, with indicators such as mental and emotional health and attachment and behaviour functioning receiving substantial attention. Conversely, key gaps were identified, including the limited reporting of ICP outcomes (e.g., identity and self-respect). System-level factors, such as care quality and placement type, were most frequently reported across outcome domains and indicators. Individual child level and socio-relational-level factors were consistently highlighted, while community-level factors were largely underrepresented. Conclusion: Future research should target gaps in underexplored outcome domains like ICP and indicators such as bullying, mortality, and educational readiness. Community-level factors warrant more attention as they play a significant role in supporting transitions to independence and social integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Richmond Opoku & Natasha Judd & Katie Cresswell & Michael Parker & Michaela James & Jonathan Scourfield & Karen Hughes & Jane Noyes & Dan Bristow & Evangelos Kontopantelis & Sinead Brophy & Natasha Ke, 2026. "Mapping the evidence on outcomes of childhood out-of-home care: A scoping review of reviews," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(2), pages 1-23, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0325409
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325409
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325409
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325409&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0325409?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0325409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.