MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Developmental Prevention

2018· reference-entry· en· W2957848797 on OpenAlexaff
Jobina Li, Cameron N. McIntosh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsPublic Safety CanadaGovernment of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCost–benefit analysisInvestment (military)Perspective (graphical)Intervention (counseling)Crime preventionEconomic JusticeCriminal justiceReturn on investmentRisk analysis (engineering)Actuarial sciencePublic economicsBusinessEconomicsCriminologyPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceLawMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides a cost-benefit analysis of developmental crime prevention. From a life-course perspective, developmental prevention offers an intriguing solution to address growing concerns regarding current criminal justice practices, given the growing body of research that suggests that this type of intervention is both results-oriented and fiscally responsible. To this end, this chapter lays out the case for the economics of developmental crime prevention. It next provides an overview of the methodological basis, and related considerations, of a cost-benefit analysis, which assigns monetary values to program outcomes relative to program costs so as to provide an estimate of the financial return on investment. The chapter then reviews the leading cost-benefit analysis studies in developmental crime prevention today and offers a glimpse at the future of such research.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.493
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.035 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→