MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413359545 · doi:10.1002/cbm.2005

The impact of a community mental health initiative on outcomes for offenders with a serious mental disorder

2016· article· en· W2413359545 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

VenueCriminal Behaviour and Mental Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismMental healthPrisonPsychiatryIntervention (counseling)PsychologyConfoundingClinical psychologyMedicineCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Community Mental Health Initiative (CMHI) is mandated to assist offenders with serious mental disorders in their transition from institutions to the community, but this incorporates different styles of service. An important unanswered question is whether these are equivalent. AIMS/HYPOTHESES: Our aim was to compare outcomes for different intervention styles within the CMHI, a programme for serious offenders in prison who also have at least one major mental disorder. Our specific research questions were as follows: do outcomes differ according to whether offenders with mental health difficulties receive (1) clinical discharge planning only; (2) community mental health services only; (3) the combined services or (4) none, although meeting criteria for any CMHI service? METHODS: Survival analyses, controlling for variables with a significant effect on recidivism or return to prison, were used to test for differences in recidivism or return to prison rates between the intervention and no-intervention groups during a fixed follow-up period. RESULTS: Men receiving only community mental health services had a significantly lower risk of returning to custody and of recidivism than men receiving discharge planning alone or no community mental health service at all, even after controlling for potential confounders including age, number of previous imprisonments and number of previous community failures. The advantages were apparent within 3-6 months and sustained for up to 4 years. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Provision of specialised community mental health services for higher-risk male offenders with a mental disorder may reduce recidivism in the short and longer term - within 3 months and up to 4 years respectively. Statistical modelling also pointed to the need to include treatment for substance abuse and assistance in identifying stable accommodation and brokerage of community services among the interventions and services. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.346 · 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