Table 3 Outcome data summary
ID | Authors | Outcomes measured | Effect size (d) | Mean difference (SE) | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Alzua, Cruces, & Lopez-Erazo [30] | Employment status | .154 | .113 (.049) | |
Receipt of welfare (F) | – | −.056 (.002) | Female only | ||
Credit standing | – | .524 (.813) | Sum of post treatment | ||
N credit enquiries | – | .900 (.342) | Sum of post treatment | ||
2 | Attanasio, Kugler, & Meghir [29] | Employment status (F) | .066 | .054 (.022) | |
Employment status (M) | −.032 | −.027 (.030) | |||
Earnings (F) | .085 | 34668 (9743) | Columbian pesos | ||
Earnings (M) | .028 | 13690 (12819) | Columbian pesos | ||
3 | Bloom, Orr, Cave, Bell, & Doolittle [33] | Employment status (F) | – | 2.8% | |
Employment status (M) | – | 1.5% | |||
Earnings (F) | – | −182 | $USD | ||
Earnings (M) | – | −854 | $USD | ||
Achieved HSD or GED (F) | – | 5.8% | |||
Achieved HSD or GED (M) | – | 6.0% | |||
4 | Borland, Tseng, & Wilkins [31] | Employment status | – | .03 | No SE reported. 2-year follow-up. |
N days income support | – | 18 | 3-year follow-up | ||
Receipt of welfare | – | 267.2 | $AUD; 3-year follow-up | ||
DEEWR expenditure | – | 194.1 | 2-year follow-up | ||
Health | – | −.09 | 2-year follow-up; self reported | ||
Wellbeing | – | −.13 | 2-year follow-up; self reported | ||
Community activities | – | −.09 | 2-year follow-up; self reported | ||
Housing | – | −.05 | 2-year follow-up; self reported | ||
5 | Borland, & Tseng [34] | Receipt of welfare | – | −2.8 | 12-month follow-up; percentage chance in participants only (no control data) |
6 | Card, Ibarrarán, Regalia, Rosas-Shady, & Soares [35] | Employment status | .040 | 4.0% (3.9) | |
Earnings | .061 | 446 (284) | Dominican peso | ||
7 | Cave, Bos, Doolittle & Toussaint [28] | Employment status | – | .4% | Ever employed; 4-year follow-up totals: |
Earnings | – | 214 | $USD | ||
Receipt of welfare | – | −775 | $USD | ||
Receipt of education | – | 365.15 | Hours in education | ||
Receipt of qualification | – | 13.4% | |||
Pregnancy | – | −4.9% | |||
Criminal activity | – | −.3% | |||
8 | Chen [36] | Employment status | .037 | −.038 (.01) | |
Earnings(weekly) | .047 | 22.19 (4.65) | |||
Receipt of welfare | −.021 | −84.29 (38.27) | |||
9 | Creed, Machin, & Hicks [37] | Self-esteem | .486 | 1.99 (4.14) | |
Psyc. distress | −.348 | −1.93 (5.45) | |||
10 | Creed, Machin, & Hicks [38] | Self-esteem | 1.08 | 3.51 (3.05) | |
Psyc. distress | −1.43 | −6.62 (4.25) | |||
11 | Donovan, Oddy, Pardoe, & Ades [39] | Health status | – | −2.68 (.92) | Adjusted for T1 and gender |
12 | Stafford [40] | Health status | – | – | Cohort measured varied therefore comparison not possible |
13 | Mounsey [41] | NEET status: | Estimates using nearest neighbour matching | ||
YTS1 (M) | – | −.289 (.264) | |||
YTS1 (F) | – | −.122 (.201) | |||
YTS2 (M) | – | −.354 (.111) | |||
YTS2 (F) | – | −.370 (.120) | |||
YT (M) | – | .167 (.267) | |||
YT (F) | – | .125 (.249) | |||
Expected earnings | – | 7.6% | |||
reservation wages | – | 8.6% | |||
14 | Nafilyan, & Speckesser [42] | NEET status | – | −11.01 | No SE presented |
15 | Schochet, McConnell, & Burghardt [43] | Employment status | 2.9% | 6.5-year follow-up | |
Earnings | – | 84 | 5.5-year follow-up; average earnings by quarter; $USD | ||
16 | Schochet, Burghardt, & Glazerman [44] | Employment status | – | 3% | 4-year follow-up |
Earnings | – | 18.1 | Average weekly earnings | ||
Receipt of welfare | – | −80.1 | $USD | ||
Receipt of education | – | 20.8% | Ever enrolled | ||
Health status | – | 2.3% | Self-reported excellent | ||
Criminal activity | – | −3.8% | Ever arrested or charged | ||
17 | Tanner, Purdon, D’Souza, & Finch [32] | Education and employment | – | 13.1% | |
Confidence | – | 3.5% | Self report | ||
Independence | – | .6% | Self report | ||
18 | Grace & Gill [45] | Earnings | .025 | 1200 | $AUD; 24-month follow-up |
Welfare receipt | .034 | 172 | $AUD; 24-month follow-up | ||
Housing | .08 | 0.3 | Stability: n of moves. |