MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386737117 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.331

Reducing criminal recidivism in Alaska: The Set Free Model

2023· article· en· W4386737117 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ryan Kumar Ray, Alli Madison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecidivismCriminal justiceCommitPopulationPsychiatryPsychologyCriminologyMedicineEnvironmental healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crime associated with problematic substance use remains a defining characteristic in the United States criminal justice system. In Alaska, a perennial leader in US criminal recidivism rates, thousands of formerly incarcerated individuals continue to commit crimes and misuse drugs and alcohol following their release from incarceration. The total cost of these crimes to victims and Alaska’s criminal justice system is over $2.3 billion annually. The Set Free Model is a comprehensive intervention addressing the primary risk factors of criminal recidivism within an innovative therapeutic campus environment. Occurring within a four-phase operational framework for an average of 6 to 18 months, participants engage in a suite of services proven to reduce further criminal recidivism. These services include certified peer support, supportive housing, co-occurring substance use disorder treatment, career placement, intensive case management, and positive community reintegration. Over an 18-month period, the nonprofit treatment agency Set Free Alaska provided the Set Free Model to a sample of 32 formerly incarcerated adults at high risk of criminal recidivism. Participants displayed a 21.8% recidivism rate compared with the current rate of 66.4%. Treatment engagement rates significantly improved compared with traditional outpatient rates (94.7% vs. 66.7%). Employment rates were also remarkable compared with national employment rates at 1-year postrelease (100% vs. 37%). Validated calculations indicate the sample population may achieve $6.25 million in cost savings and net economic benefits. Evaluation results indicate the model possesses significant potential to reduce criminal recidivism and should be further expanded and evaluated.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.368
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207