MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175052318 · doi:10.1177/00938548211026706

Assessing Dynamic Risk and Dynamic Strength Change Patterns and the Relationship to Reoffending Among Women on Community Supervision

2021· article· en· W3175052318 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kayla A. Wanamaker, Shelley L. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Justice and Behavior · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic assessmentLogistic regressionRisk assessmentRecidivismPoison controlInjury preventionPsychologyMedicineComputer securityEnvironmental healthClinical psychologyComputer scienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how dynamic risk and strength factors change over time and whether these changes are predictive of reoffending outcomes. The sample includes 2,877 Canadian women under community supervision with Service Planning Instrument reassessment data. Over a 30-month period, patterns of change in total dynamic risk and strength scores were examined. Change parameters were entered into a series of logistic regression models, linking change to three reoffending outcomes: technical violations, any new charges, and new violent charges. Overall, total dynamic risk scores decreased, and total dynamic strength scores increased over time. Change in total dynamic risk scores predicted any new charges and technical violations, whereas change in total dynamic strength scores only predicted technical violations. Findings demonstrated the utility of reassessing dynamic risk and strength scores over time and support the incorporation of strengths-based approaches with women involved in the criminal justice system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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