MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113821536 · doi:10.1177/107906320201400206

The Relationship Between Static and Dynamic Risk Factors and Reconviction in a Sample of U.K. Child Abusers

2002· article· en· W2113821536 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Abuse · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)PsychologyPsychiatryDemographyMedicineClinical psychologySociologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined how well historical information and psychometric data predicted sexual recidivism in a sample of child abusers about to undergo group-based cognitive behavioral treatment in the community. Static, historical factors, as measured by the Static-99 (R. K. Hanson & D. Thornton, 2000), significantly predicted recidivism over the 6-year follow-up period. High-risk men were over 5 times more likely to be reconvicted for a sexual offence compared to low-risk men. Adding psychometric measures of dynamic risk (e.g., pro-offending attitudes, socio-affective problems) significantly increased the accuracy of risk prediction beyond the level achieved by the actuarial assessment of static factors. This result indicates the importance of considering dynamic risk factors in any comprehensive risk protocol.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.249 · 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