Prospective Field Validation of the START:AV in a Dutch Secure Youth Care Sample

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV) is a risk assessment instrument for adolescents that estimates the risk of multiple adverse outcomes. Prior research into its predictive validity is limited to a handful of studies conducted with the START:AV pilot version and often by the instrument’s developers. The present study examines the START:AV’s field validity in a secure youth care sample in the Netherlands. Using a prospective design, we investigated whether the total scores, lifetime history, and the final risk judgments of 106 START:AVs predicted inpatient incidents during a 4-month follow-up. Final risk judgments and lifetime history predicted multiple adverse outcomes, including physical aggression, institutional violations, substance use, self-injury, and victimization. The predictive validity of the total scores was significant only for physical aggression and institutional violations. Hence, the short-term predictive validity of the START:AV for inpatient incidents in a residential youth care setting was partially demonstrated and the START:AV final risk judgments can be used to guide treatment planning and decision-making regarding furlough or discharge in this setting.

Oral Assessment and Preventive Actions within the Swedish Quality Register Senior Alert: Impact on Frail Older Adults’ Oral Health in a Longitudinal Perspective

Poor oral health is common among older people in nursing homes. To identify and prevent oral health problems among the residents, ROAG-J (Revised Oral Assessment Guide–Jönköping), a risk-assessment instrument, is used by nursing staff routinely, and the outcome is registered in the web-based Swedish quality register Senior Alert. This study aims to investigate the preventive actions registered when oral health problems are identified and the effect of these actions longitudinally. ROAG-J data registered at nursing homes in Sweden during 2011–2016 were obtained from the Senior Alert database. Out of 52,740 residents (≥65 years), 41% had oral health problems, of whom 62% had preventive actions registered. The most common action was “Assistance with cleaning teeth”. Longitudinally, during the five-year observation period, a slight increase in oral health problems assessed with ROAG-J was found. Registered preventive actions, however, led to significant improvement in the subsequent assessment for the ROAG items lips, tongue, and dentures. Standardised risk assessments like ROAG-J provide an opportunity to detect problems early and establish preventive actions. The study, however, indicates a further need for structured education and a continuous follow-up in ROAG-J. Moreover, increased collaboration between nursing and dental care to improve oral health for older residents at nursing homes is needed.

We need to use words that we’d use in Brazil, right? A Community-Based Content Validation of a Translated Femicide Risk Assessment Instrument

The Danger Assessment (DA) is a widely-used risk assessment instrument designed to help women understand their risk of femicide. Currently, no validated tool exists in Brazilian Portuguese. The purpose of this study was to conduct a cross-cultural adaptation of the DA for use in the Brazilian context as a precursor to validation and broader testing among women in Brazil. This study describes a community participatory approach for translation and cultural adaptation of the DA from European to Brazilian Portuguese that engages the target population in the process. Using a three-step process, a final version of the DA-Brazil instrument was developed.

Evaluating Fairness of Algorithmic Risk Assessment Instruments: The Problem With Forcing Dichotomies

Researchers and stakeholders have developed many definitions to evaluate whether algorithmic pretrial risk assessment instruments are fair in terms of their error and accuracy. Error and accuracy are often operationalized using three sets of indicators: false-positive and false-negative percentages, false-positive and false-negative rates, and positive and negative predictive value. To calculate these indicators, a threshold must be set, and continuous risk scores must be dichotomized. We provide a data-driven examination of these three sets of indicators using data from three studies on the most widely used algorithmic pretrial risk assessment instruments: the Public Safety Assessment, the Virginia Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument, and the Federal Pretrial Risk Assessment. Overall, our findings highlight how conclusions regarding fairness are affected by the limitations of these indicators. Future work should move toward examining whether there are biases in how the risk assessment scores are used to inform decision-making.

Harnessing the Power of Data

Research capacity is the basic currency of a sentencing commission, and the gold standard is data, with its capability of being transformed into meaningful information to support policy development and guide sentencing decisions. This paper investigates the science of best practices in Pennsylvania and the roles of the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing in collecting, preparing, and disseminating sentencing and resentencing data; in collaborating with other agencies to integrate justice-related data; and in establishing partnerships to expand the research capacity of the Commission to use these data. The application of evidence-based practices—of harnessing the power of data to develop policy and support decision making—will be demonstrated through a discussion of four Commission projects: construction and validation of a sentence risk assessment instrument; comprehensive review of the use of criminal history in the Pennsylvania Sentencing Guidelines; establishment of state parole guidelines; and design of a modular population projection simulation model.