INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Mental Health Intervention Programs for At-Risk Youth: A

Systematic Literature Review

Putri Balkis Mohamad Nor., Khadijah Alavi, and Mohd Suhaimi Mohamad

Faculty of Social Science, National University of Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100177

Received: 20 November 2025; Accepted: 26 November 2025; Published: 04 December 2025

ABSTRACT

This study explores the types of mental health intervention programs implemented for at-risk youth around

different countries. Using a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) approach guided by PRISMA protocols, across

20 reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025, resilience focused, and community-based interventions

demonstrated measurable improvements in youth emotional regulation and self-efficacy. The review discovered

a wide range of intervention strategies employed internationally, with prominent approaches including cognitive-

behavioural therapy (CBT), resilience-focused programs, community-based services, nature-based

interventions, and digital or technology assisted modalities. A recurring emphasis was observed on cross-sectoral

collaboration, cultural adaptability, and youth engagement. However, the findings also highlighted significant

gaps, particularly in the representation of female youth, rural populations, and under-researched regions such as

Southeast Asia. Methodologically, many studies lacked longitudinal design, standardized outcome measures,

and youth-participatory frameworks. From a social work perspective, the review underscores the critical role of

frontline practitioners in implementing context sensitive, community driven interventions. Qualitative insights

and mixed-methods approaches were found to be underutilized, despite their value in capturing the realities and

experiences of youth and the practical dynamics of service delivery. This review provides actionable insights for

adapting global best practices to Malaysian youth contexts. By identifying global best practices and recognizing

current research limitations, the study provides a knowledge base for policymakers, practitioners, and social

work professionals to design more inclusive, culturally responsive, and evidence-based programs tailored to the

needs of at-risk youth.

Keywords: At-risk youth, mental health, intervention, resilience, institution.

INTRODUCTION

There is increasing global attention on the youth mental health considered at-risk due to their vulnerability to

diverse social, emotional, and behavioral adversities. At-risk youth such as those in institutions, and exposed to

poverty, violence, neglect, or unstable family environments are more prone to mental health disorders which

trigger nervousness, low mood, disruptive behavior, and addiction (Smith et al., 2020; WHO, 2022). When

untreated, these psychological challenges can intensify and potentially lead to delinquent behavior, often

resulting in conflict with the law (Jones & Williams, 2021).

Youth with untreated mental health issues often struggle with impulse control, emotional regulation, and ability

to make sound decisions (Brown et al., 2019). Delayed or absent mental health support may lead to adverse

outcomes such as educational disengagement, increased aggression, or involvement in criminal activity

(UNICEF, 2021). In response, many countries have implemented targeted mental health intervention programs

to tackle the unique needs of vulnerable youth, aiming to build resilience, but their effectiveness depends on the

local social, economic, and cultural contexts (Taylor & Garcia, 2023). This study aims to identify and analyze

the types of mental health interventions conducted abroad that have proven effective, to provide guidance for

program development in the local context.

The global landscape is increasingly prioritizing the development of integrated, resilience-focused mental health

interventions for at-risk youth, reflecting a broader shift from reactive to preventive care models. Innovations

Page 2229

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

include school-based programs, digital mental health platforms, nature-based therapies, and cross-sector

collaborations involving education, health, and juvenile justice systems. These approaches represent an evolving

understanding of mental health as a multidimensional issue requiring holistic and community-oriented responses.

However, several challenges continue to hinder the effectiveness and scalability of such interventions. These

include a lack of culturally appropriate models, fragmented service delivery systems, workforce limitations, and

the limited availability of long-term evaluations to assess sustained impact (Taylor & Garcia, 2023; Aazami et

al., 2023). Moreover, current intervention research often overlooks the complex social environments that shape

youth behavior, particularly among marginalized populations such as girls, rural youth, and those in lower

income countries. These gaps underscore the importance of developing context-sensitive, inclusive, and

evidence-based mental health frameworks that can be adapted to various cultural and structural realities.

Resilience-focused mental health interventions are crucial for enhancing individuals' ability to cope with stress

and adversity. Effective programs often integrate multiple components, such as psychological support, skill-

building, and environmental resources, to foster resilience across diverse populations. These interventions are

particularly beneficial for healthcare professionals, social workers, students, and other high-risk groups.

LITERATURE REVIEW

A systematic literature review was carried out following the PRISMA guidelines to ensure transparent selection

and reporting of sources. Adapted from Page et al., 2020, PRISMA work in thorough identification of databases,

abstracts and full texts reviewed to meets the necessary requirements. The literature search was performed using

leading databases, including Web of Science and Scopus. The keywords search as follow:

(TITLE-ABS-KEY ("at risk youth" OR "juvenile delinquent" OR "young offender" OR "vulnerable adolescent"

OR "justice-involved youth" OR "incarcerated youth") AND ("mental health" OR "mental well-being" OR

"psychological health" OR "emotional well-being") AND ("intervention program" OR "preventive intervention"

OR "treatment model" OR "therapeutic program" OR "rehabilitation program") AND ("resilience" OR

"psychological resilience" OR "mental resilience")) AND PUBYEAR > 2020 AND PUBYEAR < 2025 AND

(LIMIT-TO (EXACTKEYWORD, "Adolescent") OR LIMIT-TO (EXACTKEYWORD, "Mental Health"))

AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, "ar")) AND (LIMIT-TO (SUBJAREA, "SOCI" OR "PSYC" OR "MEDI"))

AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, "English"))

The article selection process involved several stages; a) initial screening to exclude irrelevant articles based on

titles and abstracts, b) full-text review to analyze relevant articles in detail, and c) data synthesis where key

findings were categorized by type of intervention and effectiveness.

This enhances keyword insert broader synonyms that includes terms like “vulnerable adolescent”, “justice-

involved youth”, or “incarcerated youth” to reflect diverse terms used in literature. It also covers different types

of interventions such as preventive, rehabilitative, and therapeutic for comprehensive results. To obtain credible

articles, the selection of articles has been determined in terms of the recent year of publication 2020-2025, journal

article as and English language to ensure quality and relevance. Meanwhile, field of study focused on

multidisciplinary literature.

In order to maintain the methodological rigor and reliability of the review, several exclusion criteria were applied

based on study design and quality. Studies were excluded if they exhibited a high risk of bias or lacked sufficient

methodological transparency, such as failing to report sampling procedures, outcome measures, or statistical

analyses. Additionally, studies with small or unrepresentative samples that limited generalizability were

excluded unless they provided unique contextual insights. Only peer-reviewed publications were included; thus,

grey literature such as dissertations, conference abstracts, and unpublished reports were omitted to ensure

consistency in scholarly standards. Further, non-English language studies were excluded due to translation

constraints, potentially introducing language bias but maintaining feasibility within the scope of the review.

Finally, studies published prior to a defined temporal threshold (2019) were excluded to ensure the findings

reflected contemporary intervention practices and theoretical advancements. These criteria were intended to

enhance the credibility and relevance of the synthesized evidence by prioritizing well-designed and transparently

reported study. Table 1 outlines the criteria for inclusion and exclusion.

Page 2230

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Table 1 Criteria for Article Selection and Rejection

Criteria Inclusion

Year of Publication Publication from 2020 to 2025

Exclusion

Publication before 2019

Thesis, proceedings, and chapter in books

Types of Reference

Field of Study

Journal Article

Social Work, Psychology, Medicine, Apart from Social Work, Psychology,

Sociology

Medicine, Sociology.

Language

English

Non-English language

The systematic literature review followed a rigorous multi-stage process of identification, screening, eligibility

assessment, and inclusion, as outlined in the PRISMA diagram. Initially, 1,750 articles were retrieved from two

primary databases: Scopus and Web of Science and three supplementary sources: Springer, PubMed, and Google

Scholar. During the identification phase, 359 duplicate records were removed, resulting in 1,391 unique articles.

However, the diagram then notes that only 74 articles were screened, indicating a likely use of relevance-based

title and abstract filtering to narrow down the pool. Based on specific exclusion criteria, 285 articles were

removed, as they were categorized as review articles or book chapters, presented as conference proceedings, and

not written in English.

Subsequently, 50 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, resulting in the exclusion of 30 that did not meet

the inclusion criteria which, lack of focus on youth populations or the absence of resilience as a primary thematic

concern. This rigorous filtering process ultimately led to the inclusion of 20 high-quality studies, which were

subjected to a quality appraisal to assess methodological robustness and relevance. While the inclusion criteria

ensured methodological quality, the review identified a scarcity of Southeast Asian studies and qualitative

research. Future reviews should broaden database coverage and integrate mixed methods approaches to capture

lived experiences and contextual challenges. The diagram illustrates the systematic and transparent approach

employed to ensure that only the most pertinent and reliable literature was included, thus enhancing the validity

and credibility of the review's findings as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 PRISMA Diagram Illustrating Study Selection Process

The Findings

Page 2231

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Contemporary youth mental health programs globally are characterized by integrated care models, sensitivity to

cultural contexts, and diverse engagement techniques. Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, South Korea, and

New Zealand are among the countries that have implemented diverse models ranging from cross-sectoral

therapeutic approaches and resilience-building programs to nature-based interventions and equity-focused policy

frameworks. These global efforts reflect a growing recognition of the need for holistic, contextually relevant

strategies that address both individual and structural determinants of youth mental health.

The analysis of international literature revealed a range of intervention strategies targeting youth mental health

and resilience, which can be grouped into six major thematic areas as follow:

 Systems-Level and Cross-Sector Collaboration - wherein interventions aim to integrate services across

institutional boundaries. For instance, in Canada, Henderson et al. (2017) implemented the RAFT

program, which combined Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) with a coordinated response across

integrated care systems supporting youth with concurrent mental health and substance use disorder.

Similarly, Wasserman et al. (2021) described the e-Connect model in the United States, which created

structured clinical linkages between the juvenile justice system and behavioral health sector to facilitate

streamlined referrals and service access. South Africa demonstrated a community-based co-production

model, where mental health was embedded into existing psychosocial supports through a Train-the-

Trainer approach, reflecting a low-resource yet scalable systems integration model (Vostanis, 2024).

 Resilience-Focused and Strength-Based Interventions - Interventions promoting resilience and

capitalizing on individual strengths were frequently implemented within educational and community

environments. In Australia, Dray (2021) proposed a conceptual framework that emphasized

strengthening protective factors to foster psychological resilience in children and adolescents. In the U.S.,

Senior et al. (2022) found that a school-based resilience-building program significantly improved

emotional regulation in underserved youth aged 9–12. Likewise, Sabin et al. (2021) reported that a

universal resilience coaching intervention boosted self-efficacy and reduced internalizing symptoms,

particularly among students with elevated negative affectivity.

 Innovative and Nature-Based Interventions - formed a third theme, offering culturally responsive and

non-traditional alternatives. South Korea has implemented a forest therapy program for juvenile

probationers, which not only reduced physiological stress markers but also improved psychological well-

being (Jeon, 2021). These findings illustrate the potential of ecotherapy models as complementary or

alternative mental health interventions, particularly in restorative justice contexts.

 Mentorship and Relationship-Centered Approaches - in the Netherlands, Koper et al. (2024) evaluated a

multidisciplinary program that included youth-initiated mentoring as a core component, aimed at

supporting youth from multi-problem families. Complementary evidence from a global systematic

review (Merhi et al., 2024) emphasized the positive outcomes associated with maintaining caregiver and

maternal attachments for children affected by parental incarceration.

 Equity-Focused and Policy-Level Frameworks - which shift the lens from individual treatment to

structural change. In New Zealand, Fleming et al. (2024) introduced a national equity framework that

promotes culturally safe, community-driven mental health strategies tailored to indigenous Māori and

Pacific youth. This framework not only addresses systemic disparities but also ensures that interventions

are grounded in the lived realities of marginalized populations.

 Risk Identification and Transdiagnostic Factor Analysis - while not interventionist per se, these studies

inform targeted program development by identifying youth at highest risk. Klein et al. (2024) has led a

longitudinal study in the United States using machine learning to reveal that emotional dysregulation and

negative affectivity were strong predictors of future mental illness and substance misuse among at-risk

youth.

In summary, the themes identified highlight a globally diverse yet converging approach to youth mental health

interventions, with a common emphasis on integrated care, resilience promotion, supportive relationships, and

Page 2232

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

social equity. Despite promising models, inconsistencies in program definitions and outcome measures across

studies point to the need for greater methodological rigor. The findings emphasize the significance of progressing

toward integrated, culturally relevant, and evidence-based strategies to respond effectively to the intricate mental

health challenges faced by at-risk youth globally. Table 2 shows six types of intervention that explore countries

approach on mental health intervention programs targeting at-risk youth.

Table 2 Countries Strategy on Mental Health Intervention Programs Targeting At-Risk Youth

No Type

of Country

Target

Population Measures

Key Outcome Effectiveness

Summary

Implementation

Challenges

Intervention

1

Resilience-

Focused

Programs

Australia, School-aged Emotional

USA youth (9– regulation,

Improved emotional Limited

control and reduced longitudinal

internalizing symptoms data;

17)

self-efficacy,

coping skills

(Dray, 2021; Senior et inconsistent use

al., 2022)

of validated tools

2

3

Nature-Based/ South

Juvenile

probationers well-being,

HRV

Psychological Reduced physiological High resource

stress and improved demand; limited

(stress well-being (Jeon et al., scalability

indicators) 2021)

Ecotherapy

Korea

Interventions

Cross-Sector/

Systems

Canada,

USA,

Youth with Service access, Improved

co-

occurring

disorders

care Resource

and

treatment

continuity

coordination

service

and coordination

Collaboration South

Africa

linkage gaps

across

(Wasserman et al., agencies

2021; Vostanis, 2024)

4

5

6

Mentorship

and

Relationship-

Based Models

Netherlan Youth from Family

Strengthened

bonds,

family No

reduced improvement in

youth safety, unsafety (Koper et al., youth mental

consistent

ds

multi-

functioning,

problem

families

resilience

2024)

outcomes

Digital/

Technology-

Assisted

Canada

At-risk

adolescents level,

Engagement

Increased accessibility Requires digital

engagement literacy and

reported mood (Toews et al., 2024) monitoring

self- and

Programs

Equity-

New

Marginalize Access equity, Improved

inclusion Limited

Focused/

Zealand

d and mental health and culturally safe measurable

Policy-Level

Frameworks

indigenous

youth

disparities

approaches (Fleming et mental

al., 2024) outcome data

health

DISCUSSION

This review identified a range of studies exploring mental health interventions for at-risk youth across diverse

international contexts. However, a critical appraisal of the methodological quality of these studies revealed

several limitations that may influence the robustness and generalizability of their findings. Notably, only one

study employed a clearly relevant sampling strategy namely a longitudinal design, while the majority relied on

descriptive or non-randomized approaches. This limits the internal validity and hinders the ability to infer causal

relationships. Moreover, none of the reviewed studies provided sufficient evidence to confirm that their samples

were representative of the broader youth population. The absence of representative sampling raises concerns

about the external validity of the findings and their applicability across varied youth demographics and service

settings.

Page 2233

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Despite these sampling-related limitations, most studies demonstrated a low risk of nonresponse bias, with only

one explicitly acknowledging the potential effects of self-report bias (Klein et al., 2024). Additionally, only two

studies applied statistical analyses that were clearly appropriate to their design, particularly those employing

quantitative or mixed methods approaches (Henderson et al., 2017; Klein et al., 2024). While outcome measures

related to mental health and resilience were commonly reported, there was inconsistency in the use of validated

measurement tools. This variability may compromise the reliability of the reported outcomes and reduce

confidence in drawing generalized conclusions across the studies.

Beyond methodological considerations, several studies also reported important limitations specific to their

design or implementation. For instance, Dray (2021) highlighted that her work was conceptual in nature and

lacked rigorous trial data. Similarly, Henderson et al. (2017) acknowledged that their intervention was still in a

preliminary stage of evaluation. According to Klein et al. (2024), a key limitation was the use of self-reported

data and the omission of random assignment, which both can influence the validity of reported effects. Toews et

al. (2024) recognized variability in the effectiveness of counseling-based strategies, emphasizing the need for

tailored interventions. These self-reported limitations reflect an awareness among researchers of the constraints

inherent in their work and underscore the need for more robust study designs moving forward. Besides, a

recurring limitation across studies is the lack of youth involvement in intervention design and evaluation.

Incorporating participatory frameworks and qualitative insights can enhance intervention relevance, ensure

cultural fit, and improve engagement outcomes.

Despite these limitations, the reviewed studies remain highly relevant to the central research question, which

aims to identify effective intervention strategies for improving youth mental health outcomes. Several studies

emphasized the value of multi-dimensional engagement strategies tailored to at-risk populations (Toews et al.,

2024), while others supported the significance of implementing resilience-centered intervention in preventing

mental health deterioration (Dray, 2021). Henderson et al. (2017) and Wasserman et al. (2021) further

underscored the necessity of cross-sector collaboration in addressing co-occurring disorders and bridging service

gaps, particularly among justice-involved youth. These insights contribute to a growing body of evidence

advocating for integrated, holistic, and context-sensitive approaches to youth mental health intervention.

The findings indicate that structured programs with professional guidance are more effective compared to

unstructured approaches. Although digital interventions are gaining traction, community and family support

remain critical to the recovery process of at-risk youth. Major challenges identified include limited resources, a

shortage of trained personnel, and the need for long-term effectiveness assessments.

CONCLUSION

This systematic literature review synthesized global strategies addressing the mental health need of at-risk youth,

particularly to institutionalized and justice involved groups. The results indicated diverse interventions, ranging

from cognitive-behavioural therapy and resilience-building strategies to community-based care, nature-

integrated therapies, and policies rooted in equity. Despite the diversity of implementation models across various

countries, a shared emphasis emerged on the importance of integrated care systems, culturally responsive

practices, and the promotion of youth resilience through structured programming and supportive relationships.

However, the review also uncovered several methodological and practical challenges that limit the

generalizability and long-term impact of these interventions. Many studies lacked representative sampling,

consistent use of validated outcome measures, and longitudinal follow-up data. While digital and innovative

interventions show considerable potential, their effectiveness relies heavily on quality implementation,

stakeholder engagement, and professional oversight. Moreover, structural barriers such as limited resources, a

shortage of trained personnel, and fragmented service delivery systems continue to impede progress in delivering

effective care to at-risk youth. The underrepresentation of youth voices in program development further suggests

the need for more participatory approaches in mental health intervention design.

Considering these findings, several recommendations are proposed to inform future practice and policymaking.

To translate evidence into local impact, Malaysia should prioritize pilot testing resilience-based, culturally

adapted programs with embedded monitoring tools. Multi-stakeholder collaboration between schools,

Page 2234

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

community centers, and social services is vital for sustainability. First, local stakeholders are encouraged to adapt

successful international models such as cross-sectoral collaboration and resilience-based frameworks while

tailoring them to Malaysia’s unique socio-cultural and institutional context. Second, sustained investment is

needed in workforce development, particularly in training mental health professionals, social workers, and

educators equipped to work with institutionalized and at-risk youth. Third, future programs should incorporate

rigorous monitoring and evaluation mechanisms that utilize standardized outcome tools and enable tracking of

long-term effects across different demographic groups.

Equally important is the establishment of a comprehensive collaboration ecosystem among medical doctors,

clinical psychologists, counselors, and social workers. Each professional group brings a unique set of expertise

that, when integrated, enhances early detection, intervention planning, therapeutic engagement, and reintegration

support for at-risk youth. Developing interdisciplinary teams within schools, juvenile facilities, and community-

based programs can ensure continuity of care and a holistic understanding of youth needs. This collaborative

model should also involve shared case management, joint training initiatives, and centralized referral systems to

address service fragmentation and improve outcomes.

Additionally, the co-design of interventions with youth is essential to ensure their relevance, engagement, and

effectiveness. Involving young people in shaping the programs that affect them fosters ownership and better

addresses their specific needs and lived experiences. Actively engaging youth as co-designers empowers them

to shape interventions that reflect their lived experiences and cultural realities, improving both feasibility and

outcomes. Incorporating youth perspectives also enhances program ownership, fosters trust, and increases long-

term engagement. Finally, all intervention models must account for cultural dynamics, particularly in addressing

stigma, family relationships, and community norms, which significantly influence mental health outcomes. By

advancing holistic, context-sensitive, and evidence-based strategies underpinned by interdisciplinary

collaboration stakeholders can make meaningful progress in improving the mental health trajectories of at-risk

youth and building a more responsive, sustainable care ecosystem.

Future research should aim to address several significant gaps identified in this review. Geographically, high-

income regions including North America, Europe, and Oceania dominated the research landscape, whereas

regions like Asia, Africa and Latin America were underrepresented. This imbalance restricts the global

applicability of current evidence and calls for more context-specific research in underrepresented areas,

particularly within low and middle-income countries. Additionally, there is a need for more inclusive research

that reflects the diverse profiles of at-risk youth. Female youth, rural communities, and indigenous populations

remain significantly underrepresented in existing intervention studies.

Future research should explore long-term programs outcomes and utilize participatory approaches that actively

engage youth in both the design and evaluation processes. This strategy will empower youth to contribute to

program development and assessment. Addressing these gaps will not only enhance the cultural and contextual

relevance of mental health programs but also improve the equity and impact of interventions globally.

Beyond these population and geographic gaps, this review also highlights significant methodological limitations

in current research. Many studies lacked rigorous sampling strategies, such as randomization or representative

recruitment methods, and few incorporated longitudinal designs to assess the sustained impact of interventions

over time. A common limitation across studies was the inconsistent use of validated outcome measures for

assessing mental health, resilience, or behavioural changes. This lack of consistency makes it difficult to compare

interventions and draw broader conclusions. Therefore, upcoming studies encouraged to implement stronger and

transparent research frameworks like randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental models, and

mixed-methods frameworks that can better capture both effectiveness and process outcomes.

Importantly, there is also a need to elevate the role of qualitative research in youth mental health intervention

studies. While quantitative outcomes are crucial, they often overlook the experiential, relational, and contextual

dimensions that shape how youth engage with services and sustain change. Qualitative methods such as

interviews, focus groups, and participatory action research can illuminate the lived experiences of at-risk youth,

as well as the relational dynamics between youth, caregivers, and practitioners. Such insights are particularly

valuable in the social work context, where practitioners engage with youth holistically and across systems.

Page 2235

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

Incorporating qualitative or mixed-methods approaches can help reveal mechanisms of change, inform culturally

relevant adaptations, and enhance the practical relevance of programs.

Furthermore, this study underscores the urgent need to expand mental health intervention research within

Southeast Asia, a region that remains critically underrepresented in current global literature. By addressing this

gap, future research can contextualize international models to regional realities, advancing more inclusive and

locally resonant strategies.

From a social work perspective, future research should place greater emphasis on the frontline roles of social

workers in the design, delivery, and evaluation of interventions. Despite being essential actors in cross-sector

collaboration, case management, and trauma-informed care, their contributions are rarely centered in the

literature. Research that examines the effectiveness of social work-led models, such as strengths-based practice,

community engagement strategies, and culturally grounded outreach, would provide valuable guidance for

practitioners and policymakers alike. Moreover, youth-participatory research methods that align with social

work values of empowerment and collaboration should be prioritized to ensure that interventions are not only

evidence-based but also youth-informed and socially responsive.

In sum, advancing the field of youth mental health intervention research requires both methodological innovation

and disciplinary inclusivity. By addressing gaps in locality, design, and practices able to generate more effective,

equitable, and context-sensitive solutions for at-risk youth in future research.

Significance And Implication of Study

This study offers critical insights into global strategies for addressing the mental health needs of at-risk youth,

with a particular emphasis on institutionalized and justice-involved populations. By synthesizing a wide array

of intervention models, the review highlights the global momentum toward integrated, culturally responsive, and

youth-centered mental healthcare. The significance of this study lies in its ability to illuminate both the strengths

and gaps in existing approaches. It underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the adoption

of holistic care models that recognize the complex, overlapping needs of vulnerable youth. Equally important is

the study’s emphasis on resilience-building and structured support systems, which have emerged as critical

protective mechanisms in promoting positive mental health outcomes.

Implications for practice are substantial. The findings support the need for countries like Malaysia to

contextualize and adapt effective international models, ensuring alignment with local socio-cultural dynamics.

Furthermore, the study advocates for stronger workforce development, long-term monitoring, and inclusive

program design especially involving youth as active stakeholders. These insights are especially relevant for

policymakers, educators, mental health professionals, and juvenile justice stakeholders seeking to develop more

sustainable and impactful intervention frameworks. Ultimately, this review contributes to the global dialogue

on youth mental health by providing an evidence-based foundation for designing resilient, equitable, and

collaborative systems of care that can transform how services are delivered to at-risk populations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for

providing access to research databases and essential resources that supported the successful completion of this

systematic review. Special appreciation is also extended to Yayasan Sime Darby and the Mental Illness

Awareness and Support Association (MIASA) for their commitment to advancing mental health research. Their

support has been instrumental in facilitating this study.

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Page 2236

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

REFERENCES

1. Baetz, C. L., Surko, M., Moaveni, M., McNair, F., Bart, A., Workman, S., Tedeschi, F., Havens, Quinlan,

C., & Horwitz, S. M. (2021). Impact of a trauma-informed intervention for youth and staff on rates of

violence

in

juvenile

detention

settings.

Journal

of

Interpersonal

Violence.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519857163 .

2. Brown, J. D., Tolou-Shams, M., & Marshall, B. D. (2019). The role of mental health in predicting

juvenile recidivism. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 32 (3), 123–131.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jcap.12238 .

3. Dardas, L. A., Qaddoura, N., Al-Khayat, A., & Al-Maharmeh, M. (2025). The mental health needs of

youth involved in the juvenile justice system in Jordan. Health & Justice, 13, Article 12.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-024-00310-8 .

4. Dray J. (2021). Child and adolescent mental health and resilience-focussed interventions: a conceptual

analysis to inform future research. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Jul 8;18(14):7315.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147315 .

5. Fleming, T., Archer, D., Taing, S., Sutcliffe, K., & Clark, T. C. (2024). Priority actions for improving

population youth mental health: An equity framework for Aotearoa New Zealand. New Zealand Medical

Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhp.2024.200340 .

6. Gagnon, J. C., Ruiz, E., Mathur, S. R., & Mason-Williams, L. (2022). Interventions addressing

incarcerated youth behavior: a review of literature. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 92 (4), 405–

417. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000621 .

7. Henderson, J. L., Brownlie, E. B., McMain, S., et al. (2019). Enhancing prevention and intervention for

youth concurrent mental health and substance use disorders: the research and action for teens study. Early

Intervention in Psychiatry, 13, 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12458

8. Hodgkinson, R., Beattie, S., Roberts, R., & Hardy, L. (2021). Psychological resilience interventions to

reduce recidivism in young people: a systematic review. Adolescent Research Review, 6 (4), 333–357.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-020-00138-x .

9. Jeon, J., Kim, Y., Yeon, J., & Shin, W. (2021). The physio-psychological effect of forest therapy

programs on juvenile probationers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,

18 (17), 9167. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179167 .

10. Jones, A. R., & Williams, C. D. (2021). Understanding the link between adolescent mental health and

juvenile delinquency. Youth Justice, 21 (1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225420973147 .

11. Klein RJ, Lekkas D, Nguyen ND, Jacobson NC. (2024). Comparing transdiagnostic risk factors:

predicting emergence of significant depressive, anxiety, and substance abuse symptoms among juvenile

delinquents. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. https://10.1007/s10578-024-01682-6 .

12. Merhi, R., Demou, E., & Niedzwiedz, C. (2024). Mental health and behavioral interventions for children

and adolescents with incarcerated parents: a systematic review. BMC Public Health.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-17745-z .

13. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hofmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021).

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .

14. Sabin, J. A., Goldstein, T. R., & McCauley, E. (2021). the impact of a universal mental health

intervention on youth with elevated negative affectivity. Journal of School Psychology, 85, 12–24.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2021.08.002 .

15. Schutte, V., Danseco, E., Lucente, G., & Sundar, P. (2023). Mental health treatment programs for

children and young people in secure settings: a systematic review. International Journal of Mental Health

Systems, 17, Article 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-023-00599-2 .

16. Senior, J., Godovich, S. A., Shiffrin, N., Cummings, C., Alvord, M. K., & Rich, B. A. (2022). The effects

of a school-based resilience intervention for youth with socioemotional difficulties. School Psychology

International, 43 (5), 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343221108824 .

17. Smith, K., Zhang, Y., & Patel, R. (2020). Risk factors for mental illness in at-risk youth populations: a

global

overview.

Child

and

Adolescent

Mental

Health,

25

(4),

185–192.

https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12345 .

Page 2237

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025

18. Taylor, S. R., & Garcia, M. L. (2023). Evidence-based mental health interventions for at-risk youth: a

global review. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 35 (2), 101–110.

https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh-2023-0010 .

19. Toews, A. J., Letourneau, N., Pohl, C., & Ruse, K. (2024). Effective strategies and interventions for

engaging at-risk youth: a rapid systematic review of the literature. Children and Youth Services Review.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.106789 .

20. UNICEF. (2021). Children in conflict with the law: international standards and strategies for juvenile

justice reform. United Nations Children’s Fund. https://www.unicef.org/reports/juvenile-justice-reform.

21. Vostanis, P., Dogar, O., Thoburn, J., & Amankwaa, I. (2024). Stakeholder perspectives of a co-produced

intervention to integrate mental health into youth development programs in South Africa. Global Mental

Health. https://doi.org/10.1017/gmh.2024.2 .

22. Wasserman, G. A., Elkington, K. S., Robson, C. L., & Taxman, F. S. (2021). Bridging juvenile justice

and behavioral health systems: development of a clinical pathways approach. administration and policy

in mental health. Mental Health Services Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-020-01090-w .

23. World Health Organization. (2022). Adolescent Mental Health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-

sheets/detail/adolescent-mental-health.

Page 2238

www.rsisinternational.org