International Perspectives on the Practical Application of Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Survey of 16 Countries

Singh, Jagdip; Desmarais, Sarah L.; Dorn, Richard Van; Otto, Randy K.; Arbach, Karin; Condemarín, Carolina; Ruiter, Corine de; Dean, Kimberlie; Doyle, Michael P.; Folino, Jorge Óscar; Godoy, Veronica G.; Grann, Martin; Ho, Robyn; Nielsen, Line; Reeves, Kim; Pham, Thierry H.; Rettenberger, Martin; Seewald, Katharina

doi:10.1037/e571212013-207

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples of calibration indicators include the positive and negative predictive values as well as the number needed to detain and number safely discharged. For a review of discrimination and calibration performance indicators, see Singh (2013).…”

Section: R34 (Methods) Describe Any Subgroup Analyses Planned a Priorimentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Singh¹,

Yang

Mulvey

2015

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Available reporting guidelines for prognostic and diagnostic accuracy studies apply primarily to biological assessment and outcomes, overlooking behavioral issues with major public health and safety implications such as violence. The present study aimed to develop the first set of reporting guidance for predictive validity studies of violence risk assessments: the Risk Assessment Guidelines for the Evaluation of Efficacy (RAGEE) Statement. A systematic search of 8 electronic databases prior to September 2012 identified 279 reporting guidelines for prognostic and diagnostic accuracy studies. Unique items were extracted and modified to make them relevant to risk assessment. A 4-wave Delphi process involving a multidisciplinary team of 37 international experts resulted in a 50-item reporting checklist. The panelists endorsed the RAGEE Statement checklist as being highly satisfactory and as indicating study features that should be reported routinely in manuscripts. Use of these proposed standards has the potential to improve the quality of the risk assessment literature.

show abstract

Section: R34 (Methods) Describe Any Subgroup Analyses Planned a Priorimentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Singh¹,

Yang

Mulvey

2015

Law and Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Version 2 of the HCR‐20 has been adopted broadly within forensic contexts to assist with release decision‐making. Based on a survey of 2,135 clinicians from 44 countries, Singh () reported that the HCR‐20 Version 2 was the most commonly used violence risk assessment instrument for both conducting risk assessments and for developing and monitoring risk management plans. Although precise numbers are not available, it is commonly used within US forensic systems for conditional release planning, as well as for institutional risk assessment and management.…”

Section: Hcr‐20 Versionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Version 3 of the Historical‐Clinical‐Risk Management‐20 (HCR‐20^V3): Relevance to Violence Risk Assessment and Management in Forensic Conditional Release Contexts

Douglas

2014

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conditional release of insanity acquittees requires decisions both about community risk level and the contextual factors that may mitigate or aggravate risk. This article discusses the potential role of the newly revised Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20, Version 3) within the conditional release context. A brief review of the structured professional judgment (SPJ) approach to violence risk assessment and management is provided. Version 2 of the HCR-20, which has been broadly adopted and evaluated, is briefly described. New features of Version 3 of the HCR-20 with particular relevance to conditional release decision-making are reviewed, including: item indicators; ratings of the relevance of risk factors to an individual's violence; risk formulation; scenario planning; and risk management planning. Version 3 of the HCR-20 includes a number of features that should assist evaluators and decision-makers to determine risk level, as well as to anticipate and specify community conditions and contexts that may mitigate or aggravate risk. Research on the HCR-20 Version 3 using approximately 800 participants across three settings (forensic psychiatric, civil psychiatric, correctional) and eight countries is reviewed.

show abstract

“…There are four key reasons for this: First, despite remarkable progress in the modernization of violence risk assessment practices in China, little guidance is available to Chinese practitioners who wish to use structured assessment instruments with their patients. Recent survey evidence confirms that lack of educational resources on violence risk assessment is a major obstacle to instrument implementation (Singh 2013). Second, mostly retrospective investigations of predictive validity have been conducted on violence risk assessment tools in China.…”

Section: Current Violence Risk Assessment Methods In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Violence Risk Assessment for Mentally Disordered Patients in Mainland of China

Singh

Yun

et al. 2014

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Chinese research literature on violence risk assessment is small compared with Western countries. However, violence by mentally disordered populations is an area of considerable importance in China, given major legal developments in recent years. The aim of the present article was to provide an overview of the current state of violence risk assessment practices in China, focusing on the role that such assessments play in forensic and non-forensic hospitals as well as in community treatment settings. The Chinese evidence base on currently available approaches to violence risk assessment was also explored. Further research on risk assessment, formulation, communication, and management is needed before it can be argued that practitioners in China charged with making risk-based decisions are using the most scientifically defensible procedures.

show abstract

International Perspectives on the Practical Application of Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Survey of 16 Countries

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Version 3 of the Historical‐Clinical‐Risk Management‐20 (HCR‐20^V3): Relevance to Violence Risk Assessment and Management in Forensic Conditional Release Contexts

A Review of Violence Risk Assessment for Mentally Disordered Patients in Mainland of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

International Perspectives on the Practical Application of Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Survey of 16 Countries

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Reporting guidance for violence risk assessment predictive validity studies: The RAGEE Statement.

Version 3 of the Historical‐Clinical‐Risk Management‐20 (HCR‐20V3): Relevance to Violence Risk Assessment and Management in Forensic Conditional Release Contexts

A Review of Violence Risk Assessment for Mentally Disordered Patients in Mainland of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Version 3 of the Historical‐Clinical‐Risk Management‐20 (HCR‐20^V3): Relevance to Violence Risk Assessment and Management in Forensic Conditional Release Contexts