Causal Impact Analysis

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 551 - 560 of 1086

Integrating economic strengthening and family coaching to reduce work-related health hazards among children of poor households: Burkina Faso (Karimli et al. 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Trickle Up and Trickle Up Plus programs on children’s exposure to work-related hazards and abuse, and children’s work-related health outcomes.…
Integrating economic strengthening and family coaching to reduce work-related health hazards among children of poor households: Burkina Faso (Karimli et al. 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Trickle Up and Trickle Up Plus programs on children’s exposure to work-related hazards and abuse, and children’s work-related health outcomes.…
Nursing interventions to help prevent children from working on the streets (Mert & Kadioglu 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to assess the impact of a program developed to prevent children under 18 years of age from working on the street. The study was an interrupted time series design conducted…
The impact of financial education for youth in Ghana (Berry et al. 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of two different financial literacy programs, Aflatoun and Honest Money Box, on child labor and school attendance of children in grades 5 and 7 in…
The impact of financial education for youth in Ghana (Berry et al. 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of two different financial literacy programs, Aflatoun and Honest Money Box, on child labor and school attendance of children in grades 5 and 7 in…
Toward reduced poverty across generations: Early findings from New York City’s conditional cash transfer program (Riccio et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Family Rewards, an experimental privately funded conditional cash transfer program in New York City, on earnings, employment, public benefits…
Microenterprise options for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: An outcome evaluation (Conroy et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a microenterprise intervention from Network180, an agency serving people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, on employment, earnings…
Improving 24-month abstinence and employment outcomes for substance-dependent women receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families with intensive case management (Morgenstern et al. 2009)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact on employment of an intensive case management (ICM) program for substance-dependent women receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).…
Managing customers’ training choices: Findings from the Individual Training Account experiment (McConnell et al. 2006)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to compare the impacts of individual training account (ITA) approaches on customers’ training completion, employment, earnings, and benefits receipt outcomes after 15…
Turning welfare into a work support: Six-year impacts on parents and children from the Minnesota Family Investment Program (Gennetian et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), a precursor to the national Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, on employment,…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.