To Detain or to Release? Correlates of Dispositions for Individuals Declared Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The extent to which risk assessment advances have influenced release decision-making by review boards (RBs) of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD) remains unclear. Our objective is to identify the psychosocial, criminological, and risk measure correlates of RB decision-making. METHOD: Data were collected through structured interviews and file reviews conducted between October 2004 and August 2006 in the sole forensic psychiatric hospital in Quebec and in 2 civil psychiatric hospitals in a large metropolitan area designated to care for people found NCRMD. The final sample consisted of 96 men. RESULTS: Dynamic, clinical risk factors are associated with decisions to detain or release people found NCRMD, rather than traditional historical risk factors such as criminal history. CONCLUSION: Dynamic variables seem appropriate for the RBs to consider given the intention of the NCRMD legislation. Further, dynamic variables provide direction for titration of treatment and supervision. Results are discussed regarding enhancing evidence-informed RB dispositions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".