MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895545492 · doi:10.1177/0093854818804601

Discrimination and Calibration Properties of the Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision in a Correctional Mental Health Sample

2018· article· en· W2895545492 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark E. Olver, Drew A. Kingston

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismMental healthSample (material)PopulationPsychiatryClinical psychologyMental illnessPsychologyDual diagnosisMedicineDemographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the predictive properties of the Level of Service Inventory–Ontario Revision (LSI-OR) in a sample of 604 provincially incarcerated men with mental illness from a correctional mental health facility followed up nearly 2 years after release. Recidivism base rates and LSI-OR scores were relatively consistent across major mental disorder categories, but higher among individuals with personality disorder, substance use disorder, or dual diagnosis. LSI-OR scores predicted general and violent recidivism in the overall sample and among specific diagnostic groups. Calibration analyses were conducted to model 1-year recidivism estimates for the overall sample and among individual diagnostic groups associated with individual LSI-OR scores. Good correspondence was observed among the different diagnostic groups, with some difference in recidivism trajectories given the differences in base rate. The results support the predictive properties of the LSI-OR with correctional mental health samples and inform the recidivism estimates associated with LSI-OR scores in this population.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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