Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects per year

Relative Effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Risk without ‘Scared Straight’ or other juvenile awareness program (Control)

Risk difference with juvenile awareness program  (95% CI)

Group recidivism (crime) (fixed effect)

27 per 100

11.8 more per 100 (from 4.17 to 20.11 more)

OR 1.68 (1.20-2.36)

794 (7)

High

Adverse Events: The intervention group was more likely to relapse into crime than the control group.

About quality of evidence (GRADE)
High quality (High): Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality (Moderate): Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality (Low): Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality (Very Low): We are very uncertain about the estimate.

Relevance of the review for disadvantaged communities

‘Scared Straight’ programs and other juvenile awareness programs do not deter crime and result in higher likelihood of juvenile delinquency.

These interventions were found to create more juvenile delinquency among a diverse group of youths 17 and younger (mostly boys) and similar results would be expected in low-resource settings.

Findings

Interpretation

Equity - Which of the PROGRESS groups examined

All of the included studies were conducted in the United States and included mostly male participants (only one study included female participants). The proportion of white youths in the studies ranged from 36% to 84%.

The included studies had diverse male participants and the results of the intervention are likely to be applicable in other settings. These programs are not effective at reducing juvenile delinquency.

Equity Applicability

The ‘Scared Straight’ and similar programs included in this review involved 1-3 visits to prisons by juvenile delinquents and those at risk of becoming juvenile delinquents for 3-13 hours. The participants were followed for 3-24 months after the intervention to assess their behavior (using court records, police records, and self-reported crime).

The interventions in the included studies had a range of visit duration and frequency. Some visits included confrontational sessions and some were educational. Overall, participants were more likely to commit crime than controls.

Only one of the included studies involved female participants. 

The included studies examined the effectiveness of ‘Scared Straight’ and similar programs on boys younger than 17. There is no evidence that these programs would be effective in other populations, such as younger children or girls.

Cost-equity

Scared Straight and similar interventions are low cost and easy to implement. However they were not found to be effective.

The intervention creates more harm than benefit and therefore is not recommended.

Monitoring & Evaluation for PROGRESS groups

‘Scared Straight’ and similar programs cause more harm and this has impacts not only on participants but as well as other citizens because of the “increase in criminal victimization.”

‘Scared Straight’ and similar juvenile awareness programs resulted in higher crime rates among the intervention than control groups. Policymakers should not consider these types of programs for preventing juvenile delinquency and should ensure that other crime deterrence programs include a plan for monitoring and evaluation t

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that ‘Scared Straight’ and similar juvenile awareness programs are not effective and may cause harm.

‘Scared Straight’ and similar juvenile awareness programs are not recommended.