Do risk assessment tools help manage and reduce risk of violence and reoffending? A systematic review.

Abstract

Although it is widely believed that risk assessment tools can help manage risk of violence and offending, it is unclear what evidence exists to support this view. As such, we conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis. To identify studies, we searched 13 databases, reviewed reference lists, and contacted experts. Through this review, we identified 73 published and unpublished studies (N = 31,551 psychiatric patients and offenders, N = 10,002 professionals) that examined either professionals' risk management efforts following the use of a tool, or rates of violence or offending following the implementation of a tool. These studies included a variety of populations (e.g., adults, adolescents), tools, and study designs. The primary findings were as follows: (a) despite some promising findings, professionals do not consistently adhere to tools or apply them to guide their risk management efforts; (b) following the use of a tool, match to the risk principle is moderate and match to the needs principle is limited, as many needs remained unaddressed; (c) there is insufficient evidence to conclude that tools directly reduce violence or reoffending, as findings are mixed; and (d) tools appear to have a more beneficial impact on risk management when agencies use careful implementation procedures and provide staff with training and guidelines related to risk management. In sum, although risk assessment tools may be an important starting point, they do not guarantee effective treatment or risk management. However, certain strategies may bolster their utility. (PsycINFO Database Record

Assessing the Interactions between Strengths and Risk Factors of Recidivism through the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY)

“…Among the evidence contributed here, we offer a study of the SAVRY's predictive ability through AUC calculations. These values are similar to those found in studies from different countries, using both English-speaking and non-English-speaking samples [27,38,44,45], and are similar to meta-analysis data of risk assessment instruments in young offenders [46]. Our results uphold the utility and good functioning of the SAVRY in contexts and languages outside of North America, making it feasible to compare studies regardless of the youths' nationalities.…”

Improving Case Plans and Interventions for Adolescents on Probation: The Implementation of the SAVRY and a Structured Case Planning Form

“…Modest match to the need principle. Following the use of risk assessment tools, match to the risk principle is often acceptable (Viljoen et al, 2018), meaning that YPOs tend to plan out higher supervision levels and more services for adolescents who are high risk than those who are low risk (Luong & Wormith, 2011;Vincent, Guy, Perrault, & Gershenson, 2016;Nelson & Vincent, 2018). However, match to the need principle is often quite modest even when tools are used (Viljoen et al, 2018).…”

“…One of the goals of these tools is to guide case planning and intervention delivery. However, research suggests that, even though tools may be a starting point, they do not guarantee that adolescents will receive the interventions that they need (Viljoen, Cochrane, & Jonnson, 2018). As such, there is a need for strategies that help to strengthen bridges between risk assessment and risk management efforts.…”

Judicial gatekeeping on scientific validity with risk assessment tools

“…The current state of algorithmic risk tools is to overwhelmingly prefer false positives over false negatives, which means that they typically result in risk inflation. 81 Another reason is that risk tools will typically generate significant false positive error rates when the base rate of reoffending is relatively low. It is just more difficult to predict infrequent events.…”