Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Structured professional judgment of violence risk in forensic clinical practice: A prospective study into the predictive validity of the Dutch HCR-20

Structured professional judgment of violence risk in forensic clinical practice: A prospective... Abstract In this prospective study, the Dutch version of the HCR-20 (an instrument assessing risk factors for violence in the past, present and future) was coded independently by three rater groups (researchers, treatment supervisors and group leaders) for 127 male mentally disordered offenders admitted to a forensic psychiatric hospital. During case conferences, the three raters discussed their ratings and reached consensus on their ratings and final risk judgment. HCR-20 ratings were related to incidents of physical violence during treatment. Overall, the predictive validity of the HCR-20 was good. We found no differences between researchers and treatment supervisors in predictive accuracy. Group leaders performed worse compared to the other two rater groups. The consensus rating was the best predictor. Implications for structured violence risk assessment in clinical practice are discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Psychology Crime and Law Taylor & Francis

Structured professional judgment of violence risk in forensic clinical practice: A prospective study into the predictive validity of the Dutch HCR-20

Psychology Crime and Law , Volume 12 (3): 16 – Jun 1, 2006
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/structured-professional-judgment-of-violence-risk-in-forensic-clinical-QkPe9GUx9i

References (43)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
1477-2744
eISSN
1068-316X
DOI
10.1080/10683160600569029
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract In this prospective study, the Dutch version of the HCR-20 (an instrument assessing risk factors for violence in the past, present and future) was coded independently by three rater groups (researchers, treatment supervisors and group leaders) for 127 male mentally disordered offenders admitted to a forensic psychiatric hospital. During case conferences, the three raters discussed their ratings and reached consensus on their ratings and final risk judgment. HCR-20 ratings were related to incidents of physical violence during treatment. Overall, the predictive validity of the HCR-20 was good. We found no differences between researchers and treatment supervisors in predictive accuracy. Group leaders performed worse compared to the other two rater groups. The consensus rating was the best predictor. Implications for structured violence risk assessment in clinical practice are discussed.

Journal

Psychology Crime and LawTaylor & Francis

Published: Jun 1, 2006

Keywords: Risk assessment; violence; HCR-20; predictive validity

There are no references for this article.