MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085751914 · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.3.318

The validity and reliability of the Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offender version: Assessing sex offender risk and evaluating therapeutic change.

2007· article· en· W2085751914 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Community Safety and Correctional ServicesUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRecidivismPsychologySex offenderSex offensePoison controlPredictive validityInter-rater reliabilityClinical psychologySexual abuseRisk assessmentInjury preventionPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyRating scaleMedicineComputer securityMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Violence Risk Scale-Sexual Offender version (VRS-SO) is a rating scale designed to assess risk and predict sexual recidivism, to measure and link treatment changes to sexual recidivism, and to inform the delivery of sexual offender treatment. The VRS-SO comprises 7 static and 17 dynamic items empirically or conceptually linked to sexual recidivism. Dynamic items with higher ratings identify treatment targets linked to sexual offending. A modified stages of change model assesses the offender's treatment readiness and change. File-based VRS-SO ratings were completed on 321 sex offenders followed up an average of 10 years post-release. VRS-SO scores predicted sexual and nonsexual violent recidivism post-release and demonstrated acceptable interrater reliability and concurrent validity. A factor analysis of the dynamic items generated 3 factors labeled Sexual Deviance, Criminality, and Treatment Responsivity, all of which predicted sexual recidivism and were differentially associated with different sex offender types. The dynamic items together made incremental contributions to sexual recidivism prediction after static risk was controlled for. Positive changes in the dynamic items, measured at pre- and posttreatment, were significantly related to reductions in sexual recidivism after risk and follow-up time were controlled for, suggesting that dynamic items are indeed dynamic or changeable in nature.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it