scholarly journals Improving risk assessment in schizophrenia: epidemiological investigation of criminal history factors

2015 ◽  
Vol 206 (5) ◽  
pp. 424-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina Witt ◽  
Paul Lichtenstein ◽  
Seena Fazel
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Violent Offence ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Incremental Predictive Validity

BackgroundViolence risk assessment in schizophrenia relies heavily on criminal history factors.AimsTo investigate which criminal history factors are most strongly associated with violent crime in schizophrenia.MethodA total of 13 806 individuals (8891 men and 4915 women) with two or more hospital admissions for schizophrenia were followed up for violent convictions. Multivariate hazard ratios for 15 criminal history factors included in different risk assessment tools were calculated. The incremental predictive validity of these factors was estimated using tests of discrimination, calibration and reclassification.ResultsOver a mean follow-up of 12.0 years, 17.3% of men (n=1535) and 5.7% of women (n=281) were convicted of a violent offence. Criminal history factors most strongly associated with subsequent violence for both men and women were a previous conviction for a violent offence; for assault, illegal threats and/or intimidation; and imprisonment. However, only a previous conviction for a violent offence was associated with incremental predictive validity in both genders following adjustment for young age and comorbid substance use disorder.ConclusionsClinical and actuarial approaches to assess violence risk can be improved if included risk factors are tested using multiple measures of performance.

The predictive validity of youth violence risk assessment tools: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 776-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Lian Koh ◽  
Andrew Day ◽  
Bianca Klettke ◽  
Michael Daffern ◽  
Chi Meng Chu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Youth Violence ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Violence Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

scholarly journals Risk Assessment in Juvenile and Young Adult Offenders: Predictive Validity of the SAVRY and SAPROF-YV

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112095974
Author(s):  
Anneke T. H. Kleeven ◽  
Michiel de Vries Robbé ◽  
Eva A. Mulder ◽  
Arne Popma
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Young Adult ◽  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Developmental Differences ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Dutch Sample

Most juvenile risk assessment tools heavily rely on a risk-focused approach. Less attention has been devoted to protective factors. This study examines the predictive validity of protective factors in addition to risk factors, and developmental differences in psychometric properties of juvenile risk assessment. For a national Dutch sample of 354 juvenile and young adult offenders (16-26 years) risk and protective factors were retrospectively assessed at discharge from seven juvenile justice institutions, using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk – Youth Version (SAPROF-YV). Results show moderate validity for both tools predicting general, violent, and nonviolent offending at different follow-up times. The SAPROF-YV provided incremental predictive validity over the SAVRY, and predictive validity was stronger for younger offenders. Evidently both the SAVRY and SAPROF-YV seem valid tools for the assessment of recidivism risk in juvenile and young adult offenders. Results highlight the importance of protective factors, especially in juvenile offenders, emphasizing the need for a balanced risk assessment.

Factors Predicting Desistance From Reoffending: A Validation Study of the SAPROF in Sexual Offenders

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 697-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dahlnym Yoon ◽  
Daniel Turner ◽  
Verena Klein ◽  
Martin Rettenberger ◽  
Reinhard Eher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Sexual Offenders ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Limited Extent ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

The present study aims at validating the German version of the Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors (SAPROF) for violence risk in a representative sample of incarcerated adult male sexual offenders. Sexual offenders ( n = 450) were rated retrospectively with the SAPROF using the database of the Federal Evaluation Centre for Violent and Sexual Offenders (FECVSO) in the Austrian Prison System. Interrater reliability and predictive validity of the SAPROF scores concerning desistance from recidivism were calculated. Concurrent and incremental validity were tested using the combination of the SAPROF and the Sexual Violence Risk–20 (SVR-20). Interrater reliability was moderate to excellent, and predictive accuracy for various types of recidivism was rather small to moderate. There was a clear negative relationship between the SAPROF and the SVR-20 risk factors. Whereas the SAPROF revealed itself as a significant predictor for various recidivism categories, it did not add any predictive value beyond the SVR-20. Although the SAPROF itself can predict desistance from recidivism, it seems to contribute to the risk assessment in convicted sexual offenders only to a limited extent, once customary risk assessment tools have been applied. Implications for clinical use and further studies are discussed.

scholarly journals Good (or bad) vibrations: clinical intuition in violence risk assessment

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 447-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Analytic Thinking ◽  
Assessment Task ◽  
Intuitive Thinking ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Managing Risk ◽  
Modes Of Thought

SummaryAssessment and management of the risk of violence in psychiatry inevitably and appropriately draws on emotionally laden ‘intuitive’ modes of thought, as well as deliberative analytic thinking. This article discusses the concept of ‘intuition’ and proposes a brief set of guidelines, derived from work by the cognitive psychologist Robin Hogarth, by which intuitive thinking may be applied by clinicians when undertaking risk assessment work. The guidelines are: consider the learning structure relevant to the risk assessment task; use your own emotions as a source of data; impose ‘circuit breakers' such as cost–benefit analyses and validated structured risk assessment tools; and use a narrative approach to develop formulations. The guidelines are intended to provide a framework for ongoing reflective practice in assessing and managing risk.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document