scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Rates of violence in patients classified as high risk by structured risk assessment instruments

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
After controlling for time at risk, the rate of violence in individuals classified as high risk by SRAIs shows substantial variation and assigning predetermined probabilities to future violence risk on the basis of a structured risk assessment is not supported by the current evidence base.
Abstract
Background Rates of violence in persons identified as high risk by structured risk assessment instruments (SRAIs) are uncertain and frequently unreported by validation studies. Aims To analyse the variation in rates of violence in individuals identified as high risk by SRAIs. Method A systematic search of databases (1995-2011) was conducted for studies on nine widely used assessment tools. Where violence rates in high-risk groups were not published, these were requested from study authors. Rate information was extracted, and binomial logistic regression was used to study heterogeneity. Results Information was collected on 13 045 participants in 57 samples from 47 independent studies. Annualised rates of violence in individuals classified as high risk varied both across and within instruments. Rates were elevated when population rates of violence were higher, when a structured professional judgement instrument was used and when there was a lower proportion of men in a study. Conclusions After controlling for time at risk, the rate of violence in individuals classified as high risk by SRAIs shows substantial variation. In the absence of information on local base rates, assigning predetermined probabilities to future violence risk on the basis of a structured risk assessment is not supported by the current evidence base. This underscores the need for caution when such risk estimates are used to influence decisions related to individual liberty and public safety.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

The American Psychiatric Association Practice Guidelines for the Psychiatric Evaluation of Adults

TL;DR: These Practice Guidelines for the Psychiatric Evaluation of Adults mark a transition in the American Psychiatric Association’s Practice Guidelines by using a “snowball” survey methodology to identify experts on psychiatric evaluation and solicit their input on aspects of the psychiatric evaluation that they saw as likely to improve specific patient outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI

Communicating the results of criterion referenced prediction measures: Risk categories for the Static-99R and Static-2002R sexual offender risk assessment tools

TL;DR: It is found that the new, common STATIC risk categories not only increase concordance of risk classification (from 51% to 72%)—they also allow evaluators to make the same inferences for offenders in the same category regardless of which instrument was used to assign category membership.
Journal ArticleDOI

European Psychiatric Association (EPA) guidance on forensic psychiatry: evidence based assessment and treatment of mentally disordered offenders

TL;DR: It is found that the evidence base for forensic-psychiatric practice is weak though there is some evidence to suggest that psychiatric care produces better outcomes than criminal justice detention only.
Journal ArticleDOI

Prediction of violent reoffending on release from prison: derivation and external validation of a scalable tool

TL;DR: A prediction model in a Swedish prison population that can assist with decision making on release by identifying those who are at low risk of future violent offending, and those at high risk of violent reoffending who might benefit from drug and alcohol treatment is developed.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Comparative Validity Analysis of Multiple Measures of Violence Risk in a Sample of Criminal Offenders

TL;DR: The authors compared the predictive validity of multiple indices of violence risk among 188 general population criminal offenders: Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20) Violence Risk Assessment Scheme, Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG), Violent Offender Risk Assessment Scale (VORAS), Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), and Screening Version (PPL:SV).
Journal ArticleDOI

Assessing Violence Risk and Psychopathy in Juvenile and Adult Offenders: A Survey of Clinical Practices

TL;DR: Results indicated that the use of risk assessment and psychopathy tools was common and Extremely few clinicians believe that juveniles should be labeled or referred to as psychopaths.
BookDOI

Handbook of violence risk assessment.

TL;DR: Heilbrun, Yasuhara, Shah, and Shah as mentioned in this paper presented a set of tools for assessing the risk of sexual and violent recidivism among sexual offenders in Ontario.
Journal ArticleDOI

Correlates of accuracy in the assessment of psychiatric inpatients' risk of violence.

TL;DR: Patients with psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, organic psychotic conditions, and mania were more likely to be accurately assessed by clinicians as being at high risk (true positives) than to be true negatives or false positives.
Journal ArticleDOI

Actuarial Assessment of Risk for Violence: Predictive Validity of the VRAG and the Historical Part of the HCR-20

TL;DR: In this article, the authors explored the predictive validity of two risk assessment instruments among mentally disordered offenders in Sweden: the historical part (H-10) of a historical, clinical, and risk management factors instrument (HCR-20) and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG).
Related Papers (5)