There is a burgeoning literature regarding using Internet-based data in employment, university admissions, and healthcare settings, but such pertaining to forensic mental health assessment (FMHA) contexts is only beginning to develop and professional ethics codes have yet to address these issues in depth. We present the first empirical investigation of mental health and related professionals' (n = 139) attitudes and practices regarding using Internet data in forensic and therapeutic contexts. Respondents reported their experiences and levels of agreement with items measuring beliefs and attitudes toward using Internet-based data in various professional situations (e.g., 23% have searched the Internet for information about a therapy client, 39% for a forensic examinee, and only 26% opposed the practice for forensic evaluators). They also reported high levels of collective agreement, including feeling that there is a lack of guidance available from professional resources regarding Internet-related issues. Implications for forensic practice and research are presented.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) often daily address diagnoses and treatment of mental disorders in their practices. The current study examined the Connected Mind Fast Check (CMFC), a two-tiered electronic screen, assessing six common mental disorders. The eight-item Initial Screen assesses possible symptoms, whereas SAM modules establish provisional diagnoses and areas of clinical concern. With 234 patients from five independent PCP offices, diagnostic accuracy was tested with the SCID-5-RV as the external criterion. Concerningly, many patients were unaware of their current mental disorders and comorbidities. The CMFC Initial Screen evidenced strong sensitivity, identifying with very few missing diagnoses. About two-thirds of provisional SAM diagnoses were confirmed with high specificities. Bipolar Disorder posed the most challenges at both tiers. Importantly, the suicide screen identified all patients with suicide plans and three-fourths with ideation. In general, the CMFC effectively identified provisional diagnoses, impairment, and potential suicidality. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10880-021-09820-1.

The professional resources of the juvenile justice system are often strained by the large influx of newly detained juveniles on a daily basis. Mental health professionals in these facilities face the crucial but time-consuming responsibility of rapidly identifying those with pressing clinical needs. For this purpose, the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2; Grisso & Barnum, 2006) was developed and widely implemented as a standard component of juvenile intake processing. Building on previous research, the current study successfully replicated the MAYSI-2 factor structure with legally involved juveniles. Unlike a previous confirmatory factor analysis (Russell, Marsee, & Ryals, 2017), this sample included juveniles with extensive substance use issues. In addition, the study explored demographic differences in MAYSI-2 elevations and observed-with several notable exceptions-similar patterns across age, gender, and ethnicity. These findings support the utility of the MAYSI-2 for efficiently and effectively screening for immediate mental health needs, which helps ensure juveniles are able to benefit from interventions aimed at criminal behavior. As noted in the discussion below, however, these results also suggest a potential need to reconsider cut score guidelines for the warning (i.e., the top 10% for juvenile offenders) level of interpretation. What is the significance of this article for the general public?The juvenile justice system is responsible for the physical and mental health welfare of the thousands of juveniles in its custody. In addressing their emotional welfare, the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 is utilized in the vast majority of American juvenile detention facilities to screen for pressing mental health needs. The current study further validates the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 scales as effectively evaluating relevant diagnostic issues and raises considerations for improving its future implementation.

No abstract

Forensic practitioners are regularly called on to conduct highly consequential evaluations of risk for recidivism and violence. Accordingly, numerous specialized risk assessment measures have been developed to evaluate an array of relevant variables. As one conceptual approach, the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS) assesses criminal thinking as a dynamic criminogenic need with predictive validity beyond historical factors. Because of its high reading level, however, a simplified version (PICTS-SV) was recently developed. The current investigation sought to (a) examine the two versions’ direct concurrence and (b) test the PICTS-SV’s vulnerability to risk minimization (RM). Two separate studies recruited 150 participants from a court-mandated substance use treatment facility. Study 1 established the PICTS-SV’s concurrent validity with the PICTS, especially at the composite level. Study 2 observed its robust resistance to RM distortion, although some validity scale revisions appear warranted. Overall, these results support the PICTS-SV’s utility for informing effective interventions and accurate risk determinations.