Dynamic Appraisal of Intimate Partner Violence Risk and Need: Results From an Outpatient Treatment Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the psychometric, predictive, and dynamic properties of intimate partner violence (IPV) risk. The sample consisted of 88 men attending an outpatient IPV correctional program. The Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA) was rated at pretreatment using participant files. The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment–Version 3 (SARA-V3) was rated at pre- and posttreatment using collateral information (e.g., facilitator ratings, files) and participant questionnaires. Recidivism data were obtained from a court database with an average follow-up of 15 months. The SARA-V3 and ODARA demonstrated strong convergent validity and predicted violent and general recidivism with moderate to high accuracy; SARA-V3 posttreatment ratings incremented the ODARA in the prediction of recidivism, yet not vice versa. Noncompleters were higher risk and had higher recidivism rates. Changes on the SARA-V3’s Perpetrator Risk Factors domain were significantly associated with decreased recidivism in bivariate analyses and some change associations remained significant with stringent controls for risk. Implications for risk assessment/management, service planning, and future research 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".