@article{ref1,
title="Gender-sensitive violence risk assessment: predictive validity of six tools in female forensic psychiatric patients",
journal="Criminal justice and behavior",
year="2019",
author="de Vogel, Vivienne and Bruggeman, Mieke and Lancel, Marike",
volume="46",
number="4",
pages="528-549",
abstract="Most violence risk assessment tools have been validated predominantly in males. In this multicenter study, the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-20 (HCR-20), Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR-20V3), Female Additional Manual (FAM), Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF), and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) were coded on file information of 78 female forensic psychiatric patients discharged between 1993 and 2012 with a mean follow-up period of 11.8 years from one of four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. Notable was the high rate of mortality (17.9%) and readmission to psychiatric settings (11.5%) after discharge. Official reconviction data could be retrieved from the Ministry of Justice and Security for 71 women. Twenty-four women (33.8%) were reconvicted after discharge, including 13 for violent offenses (18.3%). Overall, predictive validity was moderate for all types of recidivism, but low for violence. The START Vulnerability scores, HCR-20V3, and FAM showed the highest predictive accuracy for all recidivism. With respect to violent recidivism, only the START Vulnerability scores and the Clinical scale of the HCR-20V3 demonstrated significant predictive accuracy.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0093-8548",
doi="10.1177/0093854818824135",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854818824135"
}