首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Psychiatry Psychology and Law >Predictors of Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR–20:V3) summary risk ratings
【2h】

Predictors of Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR–20:V3) summary risk ratings

机译:历史临床风险管理-20版本3(HCR–20:V3)的风险预测摘要

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

How individual risk factors on structured professional judgement (SPJ) assessment tools translate into SPJ final risk formulations is unclear due to a lack of structured criteria. Understanding pathways to risk formulations is vital, as they serve as intervention targets for risk management. This study examined how Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR–20:V3) raters weighed varied information sources to complete summary risk ratings (SRRs). Four independent raters retrospectively coded an archived sample of 32 inpatients at a Canadian forensic psychiatric hospital. HCR–20:V3 SPJ SRRs were regressed on the 20 individual items and sample covariates to identify unique predictors of risk formulations across each rater. Raters consistently used HCR–20:V3 items and composite subscales for SRRs. Despite strong inter-rater agreement on the SRRs, there were variations across raters regarding which items informed each SRR. Rater-unique biases were also shown to influence SRRs. Implications for forensic practice and risk management are discussed.
机译:由于缺乏结构化的标准,目前尚不清楚结构化专业判断(SPJ)评估工具上的个体风险因素如何转化为SPJ最终风险表述。了解风险制定的途径至关重要,因为它们是风险管理的干预目标。这项研究检查了《历史临床风险管理20版》(HCR-20:V3)评估者如何权衡各种信息来源以完成汇总风险评估(SRR)。四个独立评估者对加拿大法医精神病医院的32名住院患者的存档样本进行了回顾性编码。 HCR-20:V3 SPJ SRR对20个单独项目和样本协变量进行了回归,以识别每个评估者中风险公式的独特预测因素。评分者始终使用HCR-20:V3项目和SRR的复合子量表。尽管评估者之间就SRR达成了强有力的共识,但评估者在哪些项目告知每个SRR方面仍存在差异。还显示了评分者唯一的偏见会影响SRR。讨论了司法实践和风险管理的含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号