2004
DOI: 10.1080/09638230400017087
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical assessment of risk decision support (CARDS): The development and evaluation of a feasible violence risk assessment for routine psychiatric practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
14
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
3
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We suggest that this is not possible: there is too little commonality between the RAPs we examined and it is clearly implausible to suggest that each Trust's RAP should be separately subjected to rigorous research evaluation. We concur with Watts et al (2004) that the evidence base to support the clinical effectiveness of risk assessment in general psychiatric populations is slender and that substantial development work and evaluation is required.…”
Section: Good Points Bad Pointssupporting
confidence: 61%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…We suggest that this is not possible: there is too little commonality between the RAPs we examined and it is clearly implausible to suggest that each Trust's RAP should be separately subjected to rigorous research evaluation. We concur with Watts et al (2004) that the evidence base to support the clinical effectiveness of risk assessment in general psychiatric populations is slender and that substantial development work and evaluation is required.…”
Section: Good Points Bad Pointssupporting
confidence: 61%
“…Of course one might argue that RAPs are not intended to direct clinical action. For example, the Clinical Assessment of Risk Decision Support (CARDS) approach of Watts et al (2004) is designed to support clinical decisions rather than to Risk assessment proformas in mental health 445 make them. Whether this is the intention behind RAPs more broadly is unclear since the majority did not include information describing the scope and purpose of the assessment.…”
Section: Good Points Bad Pointsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We surveyed a representative sample of mental health trusts and aimed to first establish current violence risk assessment practice and second, describe and evaluate documentation produced at a local level with the intention of supporting violence risk assessment. This survey was a component of a wider project (the Clinical Assessment of Risk Decision Support, or 'CARDS' study) to develop an evidence-based procedure for assessing violence risk in patients using adult mental health services (Watts et al, 2004).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It incorporates actuarial evidence but, like the Clinical Assessment of Risk Decision Support (CARDS [35]), it is integrated with clinical knowledge. Unlike CARDS, GRiST is based on analysis of mental-health experts' knowledge structures, to produce a formal representation of how the cues combine to influence risk.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%