MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773225133 · doi:10.1177/0093854817743539

Psychometric Examination of Treatment Change Among Mentally Disordered Offenders: A Risk–Needs Analysis

2017· article· en· W2773225133 on OpenAlexaffabout
Drew A. Kingston, Mark E. Olver

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismPsychologyClinical psychologyPoison controlInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychiatrySuicide preventionRisk assessmentMedicineMedical emergencyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined the association of psychiatric symptomatology, criminal attitudes, and treatment changes within these domains to violent and general recidivism in a sample of 614 mentally disordered offenders. Significant pre–post changes were found on multiple measures of criminal attitudes, symptomatology, and readiness for change. Antisocial Intentions and Attitudes Toward Associates (from the Measure of Criminal Attitudes and Associates [MCAA]) predicted general recidivism and covaried with the Big Four criminogenic need domains on the Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision; none of the remaining psychometric measures significantly predicted violent or general recidivism. Although pre–post changes were seldom linked to changes in recidivism, positive changes in Antisocial Intentions (MCAA) significantly predicted reductions in general recidivism via Cox regression survival analysis, controlling for baseline risk and pretreatment attitudes score. Risk and need implications of psychometric assessments of treatment change in mentally disordered offender populations are discussed.

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 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 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 score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Justice and BehaviorSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207