2022
DOI: 10.1177/00938548221107875
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predictive Validity of the Static-99R in Romania

Abstract: Empirical actuarial measures are significantly more accurate than unstructured clinical judgments in predicting recidivism risk of incarcerated populations across different cultures. In a retrospective study, we examined the predictive validity of the Static-99R, the actuarial measure most used around the world for assessing the recidivism risk of persons who committed a sexual offense (PCS), in a sample of 518 male PCS in Romania. The results showed a good predictive validity for any kind of recidivism (area … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 41 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More specifically, out of a total of 689 publications identified via literature search and gleaned from previous meta-analyses, 211 publications met our eligibility criteria, from which we excluded 157 publications due to missing information on per-risk-level sexual recidivism rates. Except for the more recent studies, most of the studies had been included in prior meta-analyses (Baudin et al, 2021; Leguízamo et al, 2017; Looman et al, 2021; Toma et al, 2022; Wong, 2021). In cases where samples had been reported in more than one publication, only the information provided in the most recently published article was included in the analysis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More specifically, out of a total of 689 publications identified via literature search and gleaned from previous meta-analyses, 211 publications met our eligibility criteria, from which we excluded 157 publications due to missing information on per-risk-level sexual recidivism rates. Except for the more recent studies, most of the studies had been included in prior meta-analyses (Baudin et al, 2021; Leguízamo et al, 2017; Looman et al, 2021; Toma et al, 2022; Wong, 2021). In cases where samples had been reported in more than one publication, only the information provided in the most recently published article was included in the analysis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%