NEW What internal or external factors/attributes most important in the resilience of a Looked after Child (Foster care child)?

A systematic literature review ideally including around 25 journal ( quantitative/qualitative papers). LitReview Topic/Question: What has research identified as internal or external factors/attributes most important in the resilience of a Looked after Child (Foster care child)? (please tweak as appropriate). Should Include: Abstract, Introduction, methods, results and discussion. Method: the purpose of this section is to provide a clear account of how papers included in the review were identified. A systematic approach to the identification and inclusion of papers must be evident and the process should be reported in such a way that it could be replicated. The first part of this section will typically indicate which databases were searched, during which time period, and using which specific keywords and combinations of them. Any date limiters used should be specified. The outcome of this first stage of the method is to indicate how many records were identified initially, both before and after the removal of duplicates. The next stage is assessing how many of this potentially large number of records will be considered more fully for inclusion in the review. This is done by setting out inclusion and exclusion criteria, much like would be done when considering what sort of participants should be included in a study. In essence, these criteria are used to determine if papers are deemed relevant for further more in-depth assessment for inclusion in the review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria will vary depending on the focus of the review. The important thing is that the criteria are clearly specified and appropriate. The criteria are used at two stages in the process: to reduce the potentially very large sample of records attained from the initial search to a much more manageable sample for more in-depth scrutiny; and, to produce the final sample of papers considered relevant for review. The full method must be represented within a PRISMA flow diagram Results: The findings arising from the critical appraisal of the papers included in the review are presented. The specific organisation of this section will depend on the focus and aims of the review and the types of studies that are reviewed (e.g. controlled trials, non-experimental studies, qualitative studies). However, there are some general requirements. One important requirement is that the method for evaluating different types of study is clear, for example through the use of critical appraisal tools (e.g. Summarise core study details and findings in tables. Ultimately, this section should enable the reader to have a strong grasp of the nature and key findings of the body of studies reviewed and their quality. Overall, the literature included in the review should be described in sufficient detail but the review must demonstrate the ability to go beyond describing and summarising the literature. The literature should be critically appraised and synthesised and conclusions should be drawn on the basis of this critical analysis. Discussion: this section draws together the major findings presented in the Results section. Include a consideration of the common methodological strengths and limitations of the Systematic Literature Reviewed, any commonalities and conflicting findings observed in the studies and potential reasons for any conflicting findings. An important aspect of the Discussion section is using the findings of the review to comment on current theory, practice and research in the topic area – what do the findings of the review suggest about relevant theory and practice? What does the review suggest about further methodological improvements/innovations in the field that might advance knowledge? Importantly, the Systematic Literature Review should present potential areas of focus or specific research questions for future research.