Predictive validity of the HKT-R Risk Assessment Tool: two and 5-Year violent recidivism in a nationwide sample of Dutch forensic psychiatric patients

This study has examined the predictive validity of the Historical Clinical Future [Historisch Klinisch Toekomst] Revised risk assessment scheme in a cohort of 347 forensic psychiatric patients, which were discharged between 2004 and 2008 from any of 12 highly secure forensic centers in the Netherlan...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Bogaerts, Stefan 1964- (VerfasserIn)
Beteiligte: Spreen, Marinus 1963- ; Horst, Paul ter
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2018
In: International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology
Jahr: 2018, Band: 62, Heft: 8, Seiten: 2259-2270
Online-Zugang: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Schlagwörter:
Violent recidivism
Predictive validity
Netherlands
Clinical decision making
HKT-R
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study has examined the predictive validity of the Historical Clinical Future [Historisch Klinisch Toekomst] Revised risk assessment scheme in a cohort of 347 forensic psychiatric patients, which were discharged between 2004 and 2008 from any of 12 highly secure forensic centers in the Netherlands. Predictive validity was measured 2 and 5 years after release. Official reconviction data obtained from the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice were used as outcome measures. Violent reoffending within 2 and 5 years after discharge was assessed. With regard to violent reoffending, results indicated that the predictive validity of the Historical domain was modest for 2 (area under the curve [AUC] = .75) and 5 (AUC = .74) years. The predictive validity of the Clinical domain was marginal for 2 (admission: AUC = .62; discharge: AUC = .63) and 5 (admission: AUC = .69; discharge: AUC = .62) years after release. The predictive validity of the Future domain was modest (AUC = .71) for 2 years and low for 5 (AUC = .58) years. The total score of the instrument was modest for 2 years (AUC = .78) and marginal for 5 (AUC = .68) years. Finally, the Final Risk Judgment was modest for 2 years (AUC = .78) and marginal for 5 (AUC = .63) years time at risk. It is concluded that this risk assessment instrument appears to be a satisfactory instrument for risk assessment.
ISSN:1552-6933
DOI:10.1177/0306624X17717128