Applying a Forensic Actuarial Assessment (the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide) to Nonforensic Patients
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The actuarial Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) was developed for male offenders where it has shown excellent replicability in many new forensic samples using officially recorded outcomes. Clinicians also make decisions, however, about the risk of interpersonal violence posed by nonforensic psychiatric patients of both sexes. Could an actuarial risk assessment developed for male forensic populations be used for a broader clientele? We modified the VRAG to permit evaluation using data from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study that included nonforensic male and female patients and primarily self-reported violence. The modified VRAG yielded a large effect size in the prediction of dichotomous postdischarge severe violence over 20 and 50 weeks. Accuracy of VRAG predictions was unrelated to sex. The results provide evidence about the robustness of comprehensive actuarial risk assessments and the generality of the personal factors that underlie violent behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it