There is growing critical commentary and debate about the relative effectiveness of individual program and generic practice approaches to identifying evidence‐based interventions and their impact on the operation of the juvenile justice system. The central issue is whether both of these approaches to identifying evidence‐based interventions provide a valid and reliable guide to improving juvenile justice programming and, if so, what are the relative advantages and disadvantages of each? From a public policy perspective, should we be investing more heavily in one or the other, or treating them as effective complementary approaches and encourage both? We address each of these questions and offer some suggestions for improving the effectiveness of each approach.

中文翻译：

---

循证少年司法方案和作法：批判性审查

关于个别程序和通用实践方法相对有效的识别和基于证据的干预措施及其对少年司法系统运作的影响，越来越多的批评评论和辩论。中心问题是，这两种识别循证干预措施的方法是否都为改进少年司法规划提供了有效和可靠的指南；如果是，每种方法的相对优缺点是什么？从公共政策的角度来看，我们应该加大对彼此的投入，还是将其视为有效的补充方法，并鼓励两者？我们解决了每个问题，并提供了一些建议，以提高每种方法的有效性。