The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START)

COVID-19 and Sinophobia: Detecting Warning Signs of Radicalization on Twitter and Reddit

Hate crimes and hateful rhetoric targeting individuals of Asian descent have increased since the outbreak of COVID-19. These troubling trends have heightened concerns about the role of the Internet in facilitating radicalization. This article explores the existence of three warning signs of radicalization-fixation, group identification, and energy bursts-using data from Twitter and Reddit. Data were collected before and after the outbreak of COVID-19 to assess the role of the pandemic in affecting social media behavior. Using computational social science and Natural Language Processing techniques, we looked for signs of radicalization targeting China or Chinese individuals. Results show that fixation on the terms China and Chinese increased on Twitter and Reddit after the pandemic began. Moreover, tweets and posts containing either of these terms became more hateful, offensive, and negative after the outbreak. We also found evidence of individuals identifying more closely with a particular group, or adopting an "us vs. them" mentality, after the outbreak of COVID-19. These findings were especially prominent in subreddits catering to self-identified Republicans and Conservatives. Finally, we detected bursts of activity on Twitter and Reddit following the start of the pandemic. These warning signs suggest COVID-19 may have had a radicalizing effect on some social media users. This work is important because it not only shows the potential radicalizing effect of the pandemic, but also demonstrates the ability to detect warning signs of radicalization on social media. This is critical, as detecting warning signs of radicalization can potentially help curb hate-fueled violence.

Outcome Measures in Forensic Mental Health Services: A Systematic Review of Instruments and Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

Background

Outcome measurement in forensic mental health services can support service improvement, research, and patient progress evaluation. This systematic review aims to identify instruments available for use as outcome measures in this field and assess the evidence for the most common instruments, specific to the forensic context, which cover multiple outcome domains.

Methods

Studies were identified by searching seven online databases. Additional searches were then performed for 10 selected instruments to identify additional information on their psychometric properties. Instrument manuals and gray literature was reviewed for information about instrument development and content validity. The quality of evidence for psychometric properties was summarized for each instrument based on the COnsensus-based Standards for health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) approach.

Results

A total of 435 different instruments or variants were identified. Psychometric information on the 10 selected instruments was extracted from 103 studies. All 10 instruments had a clinician reported component with only two having patient reported scales. Half of the instruments were primarily focused on risk. No instrument demonstrated adequate psychometric properties in all eight COSMIN categories assessed. Only one instrument, the Camberwell Assessment of Need: Forensic Version, had adequate evidence for its development and content validity. The most evidence was for construct validity, while none was identified for construct stability between groups.

Conclusions

Despite the large number of instruments potentially available, evidence for their use as outcome measures in forensic mental health services is limited. Future research and instrument development should involve patients and carers to ensure adequate content validity.

A Qualitative Study of Success in Postrelease Federal Inmates With Mental Health Issues

Considerable research has focused on factors that put individuals at risk for recidivism after their release from incarceration. While recent research has increased the focus on protective factors and resilience, the experiences of people with mental health issues who successfully reintegrate into the community are not well-understood. The present study was conducted to determine which positive factors are implicated in the successful reintegration of people with mental health issues. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with four male former federal inmates on supervised release in Canada. The interviewees were nominated by staff who knew them to have previously been diagnosed with a mental disorder and perceived them to be doing well in the community. Volunteering and social support were found to be of the greatest importance in their successful outcomes. Additionally, all interviewees had access to mental health services, which likely influenced their success.

Taking "the boss" into the real world: Field interrater reliability of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version

There is emerging evidence that the performance of risk assessment instruments is weaker when used for clinical decision-making than for research purposes. For instance, research has found lower agreement between evaluators when the risk assessments are conducted during routine practice. We examined the field interrater reliability of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV). Clinicians in a Dutch secure youth care facility completed START:AV assessments as part of the treatment routine. Consistent with previous literature, interrater reliability of the items and total scores was lower than previously reported in non-field studies. Nevertheless, moderate to good interrater reliability was found for final risk judgments on most adverse outcomes. Field studies provide insights into the actual performance of structured risk assessment in real-world settings, exposing factors that affect reliability. This information is relevant for those who wish to implement structured risk assessment with a level of reliability that is defensible considering the high stakes.

Validity of Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability in the Japanese Forensic Probation Service

This study aimed to evaluate the predictive validity and reliability of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) in the context of the Japanese forensic probation service. START is a structured professional judgement guide for risk domains concerning negative behaviors such as violence, self-harm, suicide, substance abuse, unauthorized leave, victimization, and self-neglect. In this study, rehabilitation coordinators evaluated community-dwelling patients who were treated under the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act at baseline and followed-up for 6 months. The results revealed that START vulnerability scores significantly predicted self-harm, suicide, physical aggression, substance abuse, and self-neglect. START strength scores predicted physical violence and unauthorized leave. Specific risk estimates predicted physical violence and self-neglect. Risk judgement for future substance use may require adjustments for cultural differences, because of the lower prevalence in Japan. These results suggest that START offers a feasible and valid tool that allows clinicians to plan treatment and promote recovery of forensic patients in Japan.

A retrospective study on risk assessment and management of forensic psychiatric inpatients in Hong Kong

The Department of Forensic Psychiatry of Castle Peak Hospital is the only facility in Hong Kong that provides territory-wide forensic psychiatric services for patients with criminal involvement. This retrospective study aimed to explore whether the rehabilitation programs provided by the department could significantly reduce the risks of forensic psychiatric inpatients as measured by the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START). START ratings of inpatients who were hospitalized in the department for more than 3 months and were discharged to the community during the period from 11 April 2015 to 31 March 2019 were analyzed. A total of 79 patients were assessed, of whom 61 (77.2%) were males. Fifty-four (68.4%) patients suffered from schizophrenia. START scores upon admission (strength score = 5.67; vulnerability score = 17.43) and upon discharge (strength score = 6.87, vulnerability score = 11.18) indicated significant reduction of risks among inpatients (p < 0.05).

Short-term clinical risk assessment and management: Comparing the Brockville Risk Checklist and Hamilton Anatomy of Risk Management

The current article aims to examine the performance of two brief, dynamic risk measures - the Brockville Risk Checklist (BRC4) and one of two versions of the Hamilton Anatomy of Risk Management [HARM-FV and electronic HARM-FV (eHARM-FV)] - scored at regular clinical case conferences for forensic psychiatric patients in two different settings. The eHARM represents a first-in-class dynamic risk assessment tool using data analytics. Two studies are presented from two forensic psychiatric hospitals in Ontario, Canada. The first study compared the HARM-FV, scored by trained research staff, with the BRC4, scored concurrently by clinical teams, on 36 forensic inpatients. In the second study, trained research staff scored both the BRC4 and the eHARM-FV on 55 forensic inpatients. Both studies demonstrated that the BRC4 and both HARM-FV tools were moderately and positively correlated with each other, with higher agreement for similar domains and items. In both samples, the risk measures performed better at identifying individuals who engaged in repeated or more serious problematic behavior. The HARM-FV and eHARM-FV produced higher area under the curve values for subsequent behavior compared with the BRC4. All three tools were effective at detecting future aggression and adverse incidents. We did not directly compare the HARM-FV and eHARM-FV.

Assessing Risk for Victimization in a Forensic Psychiatric Setting Using the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability

Although a growing literature on community-based victimization of people with mental illness exists, victimization within institutional settings is comparatively understudied. The current study seeks to fill this gap by exploring factors related to risk of victimization in a male forensic psychiatric sample using a relatively new risk assessment measure. The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) is a short-term risk assessment measure that compiles information about several clinically relevant risk factors to evaluate risk of victimization, among other adverse outcomes. Nearly one-third (31.3%) of the sample experienced some type of victimization during their hospitalization. The summary risk judgment and subsets of select START items effectively predicted risk of victimization in this sample with a fair degree of accuracy over a 2-month period.

The Operational Development and Empirical Testing of the Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18)

The Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18) is a structured professional judgment instrument for threat assessment of the individual terrorist. It is a rationally derived theoretical model comprising eight proximal warning behaviors and 10 distal characteristics. Empirical research on the TRAP-18 is reviewed, including both nomothetic and idiographic studies of individual terrorists in both the United States and Europe. Mean interrater reliability is 0.895 (Cohen's kappa), ranging from 0.69 to 1.0. Evidence of criterion validity has been demonstrated, including usefulness of the instrument across various extremist ideologies (jihadism, ethnic nationalism, and single-issue), and its ability to discriminate between thwarted and successful attackers. The instrument appears to advance the domain recommendations of Monahan (2012, 2016) for the risk assessment of the individual terrorist. The TRAP-18 is further discussed as a threat assessment instrument for mental health clinicians. The limitations of the current research provide direction for further studies to assess its reliability and construct, discriminant, and predictive validity.

Implementing the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) in a forensic mental health service

Aims and Method

To evaluate the practical utility and face validity of a new risk assessment guideline, the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), within a forensic mental health service. Staff attended training and subsequently used the START to assess and formulate risk. Staff then completed an evaluation questionnaire about their experiences of using the START.

Results

The study proved useful in evaluating the practical utility and face validity of the START. the START demonstrated both good practical utility and face validity. Areas of difficulty in completing the START were identified and areas for developing the START were highlighted.

Clinical Implications

The service subsequently implemented a revised version of the START into routine practice. the results of the pilot study suggest that the START can usefully assist in structuring risk judgements in practice.

Predictive validity of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) for multiple adverse outcomes: The effect of diagnosis

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) assists risk assessment for seven risk outcomes based on scoring of risk and protective factors and assignment of clinically-informed risk levels. Its predictive validity for violence and self-harm has been established in males with schizophrenia, but accuracy across pathologically diverse samples is unknown. Routine START assessments and 3-month risk outcome data of N = 527 adult, inpatients in a UK secure mental health facility were collected. The sample was divided into diagnostic groups; predictive validity was established using receiver operating characteristics regression (rocreg) analysis in which potential covariates were controlled. In most single-diagnosis groups START risk factors ('vulnerabilities'), protective factors ('strengths'), and clinically-informed estimates predicted multiple risk outcomes with effect sizes similar to previous research. Self-harm was not predicted among patients with an organic diagnosis. The START risk estimates predicted physical aggression in all diagnostic groups, and verbal aggression, self-harm and self-neglect in most diagnostic groups. The START can assist assessment of aggressive, self-harm, and self-neglect across a range of diagnostic groups. Further research with larger sample sizes of those with multiple diagnoses is required.

Instruments for the assessment of suicide risk: A systematic review evaluating the certainty of the evidence

Background

Instruments have been developed to facilitate suicide risk assessment. We aimed to evaluate the evidence for these instruments including assessment of risk of bias and diagnostic accuracy for suicide and suicide attempt.

Methods

PubMed (NLM), PsycInfo, Embase, Cinahl and the Cochrane Library databases were searched until December 2014. We assessed risk of bias with QUADAS-2. The average sensitivity and specificity of each instrument was estimated and the certainty of the evidence was assessed with GRADE. We considered instruments with a sensitivity > 80% and a specificity > 50% to have sufficient diagnostic accuracy.

Results

Thirty-five relevant studies were identified but 14 were considered to have high risk of bias, leaving 21 studies evaluating altogether 15 risk assessment instruments. We could carry out meta-analyses for five instruments. For the outcome suicide attempt SAD PERSONS Scale had a sensitivity of 15% (95% CI 8–24) and specificity of 97% (96–98), and the Manchester Self-Harm Rule (MSHR) a sensitivity of 97% (97–97) and a specificity of 20% (20–21). ReACT, which is a modification of MSHR, had a similar low specificity, as did the Sodersjukhuset Self Harm Rule. For the outcome suicide, the Beck Hopelessness Scale had a sensitivity of 89% (78–95) and specificity of 42% (40–43).

Conclusions

Most suicide risk assessment instruments were supported by too few studies to allow for evaluation of accuracy. Among those that could be evaluated, none fulfilled requirements for sufficient diagnostic accuracy.

Kriminalprognosen in der Praxis

Zusammenfassung. Einschätzungen über das Risiko zukünftiger Gewalttätigkeit sind ein fester Bestandteil der Arbeit von Psychologinnen und Psychologen, wobei bis heute wenig darüber bekannt ist, in welcher Form kriminalprognostische Einschätzungen in der alltäglichen Berufspraxis vorgenommen werden. Durch die vorliegende Forschungsarbeit wird erstmals ein Einblick in die kriminalprognostische Praxis in Deutschland gegeben. In der vorliegenden Studie werden die Ergebnisse des International Risk Surveys (IRiS; Singh et al., 2014 ) ausgewertet, an der weltweit 2135 Personen aus 44 Ländern teilgenommen haben. Aus Deutschland wurden 97 Psychologinnen und Psychologen sowie Angehörige anderer Berufsgruppen über ihre kriminalprognostischen Tätigkeiten befragt. Die Daten zeigen, dass mittlerweile in der Praxis mehrheitlich auf standardisierte Prognoseinstrumente zurückgegriffen wird. Die Instrumente werden nicht nur für die prognostische Einschätzung über das zukünftige Gewaltrisiko als nützlich eingestuft, sondern auch im Hinblick auf die Therapieindikation sowie die verlaufsdiagnostische Untersuchung von Behandlungs- und Betreuungsfällen als hilfreich beurteilt.

The Short- to Medium-Term Predictive Validity of Static and Dynamic Risk-of-Violence Measures in Medium- to Low-Secure Forensic and Civil Inpatients

The prediction and subsequent management of aggression by psychiatric inpatients is a crucial role of the mental health professional. This retrospective cohort study examines the predictive validity of 10 static and dynamic risk-of-violence measures and subscales in 37 forensic and 37 civil inpatients residing in a medium- to-low security psychiatric facility for a period of up to 6 months. Retrospective file records were sourced to conduct an AUC analysis of the ROC curve for short- and medium-term follow-up periods. The hypothesis that dynamic measures would be better predictors than static measures over the short term was supported. Albeit to a lesser extent, dynamic measures were still better predictors than static measures over the medium term. This result was seen in both civil and forensic groups. Three previously untested measures were found to predict aggression within the sample. It is recommended that mental health services employ the use of dynamic measures when making short-term risk-of-violence predictions for civil and/or forensic inpatients.

What can structured professional judgement tools contribute to management of neurobehavioural disability? Predictive validity of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) in acquired brain injury

Aggression is a frequently cited outcome of acquired brain injury (ABI). Paradoxically, evidence suggests that ABI clinicians underestimate the risk of violence, and aggression in neurobehavioural services appears more frequent than in forensic/secure psychiatric settings. Risk assessment tools are endemic in the latter and highly beneficial in managing harm. However, none has been validated for ABI. This study examines the predictive validity of ABI violence using one established tool, the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START). It is argued that successful management of aggression in neurobehavioural rehabilitation is partly attributable to ongoing programme calibration following regular review of measures conceptualised for ABI. The predictive ability of START and ABI measures was determined through correlational, receiver operating characteristic and hierarchical multiple regression analyses, using 4559 aggression recordings concerning 76 patients over 4 weeks. The START risk of violence was classed "low" for 50% of the sample and "high" for 13.7%. Significant relationships between individual measures and aggression were evident. However, multivariate analysis confirmed that the best fitting model comprised ABI measures of neurobehavioural disability and functional abilities: START data did not increase explained variance. ABI risk prediction may benefit from development of specific tools. However, these should be conceptualised for ABI to incorporate the diverse range of variables underpinning neurobehavioural disability.

The Predictive Validity of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) for Multiple Adverse Outcomes in a Secure Psychiatric Inpatient Setting

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) aims to assist mental health practitioners to estimate an individual’s short-term risk for a range of adverse outcomes via structured consideration of their risk (“Vulnerabilities”) and protective factors (“Strengths”) in 20 areas. It has demonstrated predictive validity for aggression but this is less established for other outcomes. We collated START assessments for N = 200 adults in a secure mental health hospital and ascertained 3-month risk event incidence using the START Outcomes Scale. The specific risk estimates, which are the tool developers’ suggested method of overall assessment, predicted aggression, self-harm/suicidality, and victimization, and had incremental validity over the Strength and Vulnerability scales for these outcomes. The Strength scale had incremental validity over the Vulnerability scale for aggressive outcomes; therefore, consideration of protective factors had demonstrable value in their prediction. Further evidence is required to support use of the START for the full range of outcomes it aims to predict.

Dynamic relationship between multiple START assessments and violent incidents over time: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Dynamic risk factors need to be assessed repeatedly over time rather than at a single time point to examine the relationship with violence. This predictive validity study sought to examine the degree of dynamic change in risk assessed in a group of mentally disordered offenders and the relationship between change and the occurrence of violence.

METHODS

Routine structured assessments of Strengths and Vulnerabilities on the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) instrument (n = 475) were linked prospectively with 275 violent incidents using logistic regression in a sample of 50 patients.

RESULTS

Stability within patients estimated using the intra-class correlation coefficient was high (>.80) for both Strengths and Vulnerabilities. In the overall sample, a 10 point increase in START Vulnerabilities score was associated with a three-fold increased risk of violence (OR = 3.1; 95% CI, 1.47-7.46) but there was no association for Strengths score (OR = 0.91, 95% CI, 0.34-2.47). When examined within patients, both Vulnerabilities (OR = 1.77, 95% CI, 0.56-5.54) and Strengths (OR = 2.26, 95% CI, 0.38-13.42) were associated with an increased risk of violence but in both cases precision was low due to reduced sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors which are considered to have the capacity to fluctuate dynamically did not do so substantially in this group of mentally disordered offenders. When fluctuations did occur there was some tentative evidence that they are associated with violent outcomes and could guide the use of prevention measures.

The Suicide Risk Assessment and Management Manual (S-RAMM) Validation Study II

OBJECTIVES

Structured professional judgement is now the most widely accepted approach to clinical risk assessment and risk management. The Suicide Risk Assessment and Management Manual (S-RAMM) is a new structured professional judgement tool closely modelled on the HCR-20. This is the first prospective validation study for this instrument.

METHODS

Two post-membership registrars jointly interviewed 81 of 83 current inpatients to rate the S-RAMM. Two assistant psychologists independently rated the HCR-20, GAF and PANSS. All incidents of self-harm, attempted suicide, suicide and violence to others were collated from hospital reporting of critical incidents over the next six months supplemented by examination of other records.

RESULTS

For combined self-harm and suicide outcomes, the S-RAMM total score using the receiver operating characteristic had an area under the curve AUC=0.89, (95% CI 0.79 to 0.99). The S-RAMM performed as well for the prediction of self-harm and suicide as the HCR-20 did for violence, and better than measures of mental state (PANSS total score) and global function (GAF).

CONCLUSIONS

The S-RAMM has better than minimum acceptable characteristics for use as a clinical or research tool for suicide risk assessment, and performs almost as well as the HCR-20 does for violence. Further prospective studies are now required, in other populations.

Susceptibility (risk and protective) factors for in-patient violence and self-harm: prospective study of structured professional judgement instruments START and SAPROF, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 in forensic mental health services

BACKGROUND

The START and SAPROF are newly developed fourth generation structured professional judgement instruments assessing strengths and protective factors. The DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 also measure positive factors, programme completion and recovery in forensic settings.

METHODS

We compared these instruments with other validated risk instruments (HCR-20, S-RAMM), a measure of psychopathology (PANSS) and global function (GAF). We prospectively tested whether any of these instruments predict violence or self harm in a secure hospital setting (n = 98) and whether they had true protective effects, interacting with and off-setting risk measures.

RESULTS

SAPROF and START-strengths had strong inverse (negative) correlations with the HCR-20 and S-RAMM. SAPROF correlated strongly with GAF (r = 0.745). In the prospective in-patient study, SAPROF predicted absence of violence, AUC = 0.847 and absence of self-harm AUC = 0.766. START-strengths predicted absence of violence AUC = 0.776, but did not predict absence of self-harm AUC = 0.644. The DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery scales also predicted in-patient violence (AUC 0.832 and 0.728 respectively), and both predicted in-patient self-harm (AUC 0.750 and 0.713 respectively). When adjusted for the HCR-20 total score however, SAPROF, START-S, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 scores were not significantly different for those who were violent or for those who self harmed. The SAPROF had a significant interactive effect with the HCR-dynamic score. Item to outcome studies often showed a range of strengths of association with outcomes, which may be specific to the in-patient setting and patient group studied.

CONCLUSIONS

The START and SAPROF, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 can be used to assess both reduced and increased risk of violence and self-harm in mentally ill in-patients in a secure setting. They were not consistently better than the GAF, HCR-20, S-RAMM, or PANSS when predicting adverse events. Only the SAPROF had an interactive effect with the HCR-20 risk assessment indicating a true protective effect but as structured professional judgement instruments all have additional content (items) complementary to existing risk assessments, useful for planning treatment and risk management.

A national case–control study of risk factors for suicide among prisoners in England and Wales [corrected]

PURPOSE

To examine risk factors for suicide among prisoners in a national population.

METHODS

The Ministry of Justice identified all suicides occurring in prisons in England and Wales between 2005 and 2008. Two hundred and twenty suicides were matched to 220 living controls on age, gender, date of reception into prison and establishment type. Relative risks for clinical, custodial, service-response and socio-demographic characteristics were estimated using conditional logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Having a history of violence and several indicators of past or current psychiatric illness were strong predictors at univariate level. Prisoners who died by suicide were over nine times more likely than controls to have been identified and managed as being at-risk of self-harm/suicide during the prison term. Multivariate analysis identified five mutually independent predictors: previous psychiatric service contact, history of self-harm, single cell occupation, remand status, and non-white ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Suicide risk is elevated among certain types of prisoners, and targeted suicide prevention strategies should be developed for the monitoring, care and support of the high-risk groups that we identified. Further research is needed to determine the causal mechanisms that explain why some prisoners have a higher suicide risk than their peers.

Risk assessment and shared care planning in out-patient forensic psychiatry: cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Forensic psychiatry aims to reduce recidivism and makes use of risk assessment tools to achieve this goal. Various studies have reported on the predictive qualities of these instruments, but it remains unclear whether their use is associated with actual prevention of recidivism in clinical care.

AIMS

To test whether an intervention combining risk assessment and shared care planning is associated with a reduction in violent and criminal behaviour.

METHOD

A cluster randomised controlled trial (Netherlands Trial Register number NTR1042) was conducted in three out-patient forensic psychiatric clinics. The intervention comprised risk assessment with the Short Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) and a shared care planning protocol formulated according to shared decision-making principles. The control group received usual care. The outcome consisted of the proportion of clients with violent or criminal incidents at follow-up.

RESULTS

In total 58 case managers and 632 of their clients were included. In the intervention group (n = 310), 65% received the intervention at least once. Findings showed a general treatment effect (22% of clients with an incident at baseline v. 15% at follow-up, P<0.01) but no significant difference between the two treatment conditions (odds ratio (OR) = 1.46, 95% CI 0.89-2.44, P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Although risk assessment is common practice in forensic psychiatry, our results indicate that the primary goal of preventing recidivism was not reached through risk assessment embedded in shared decision-making.

Taking Stock and Taking Steps: The Case for an Adolescent Version of the Short-Assessment of Risk and Treatability

The field of violence risk assessment has matured considerably, possibly advancing beyond its own adolescence. At this point in the field's evolution, it is more important than ever for the development of any new device to be accompanied by a strong rationale and the capacity to provide a unique contribution. With this issue in mind, we first take stock of the field of adolescent risk assessment in order to describe the rapid progress that this field has made, as well as the gaps that led us to adapt the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START; Webster, Martin, Brink, Nicholls, & Desmarais, 2009) for use with adolescents. We view the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV; Nicholls, Viljoen, Cruise, Desmarais, & Webster, 2010; Viljoen, Cruise, Nicholls, Desmarais, & Webster, in progress) as complementing other risk measures in four primary ways: 1) rather than focusing solely on violence risk, it examines broader adverse outcomes to which some adolescents are vulnerable (including self-harm, suicide, victimization, substance abuse, unauthorized leave, self-neglect, general offending); 2) it places a balanced emphasis on adolescents' strengths; 3) it focuses on dynamic factors that are relevant to short-term assessment, risk management, and treatment planning; and 4) it is designed for both mental health and justice populations. We describe the developmentally-informed approach we took in the adaptation of the START for adolescents, and outline future steps for the continuing validation and refinement of the START:AV.

Assessment of Multiple Risk Outcomes, Strengths, and Change with the START:AV: A Short-Term Prospective Study with Adolescent Offenders

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START:AV; Nicholls, Viljoen, Cruise, Desmarais, & Webster, 2010; Viljoen, Cruise, Nicholls, Desmarais, & Webster, in preparation) is a clinical guide designed to assist in the assessment and management of adolescents' risk for adverse events (e.g., violence, general offending, suicide, victimization). In this initial validation study, START:AV assessments were conducted on 90 adolescent offenders (62 male, 28 female), who were prospectively followed for a 3-month period. START:AV assessments had good to excellent inter-rater reliability and strong concurrent validity with Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth assessments (SAVRY; Borum, Bartel, & Forth, 2006). START:AV risk estimates and Vulnerability total scores predicted multiple adverse outcomes, including violence towards others, offending, victimization, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse. In addition, Strength total scores inversely predicted violence, offending, and street drug use. During the 3-month follow-up, risk estimates changed in at least one domain for 92% of youth, and 27% of youth showed reliable changes in Strength and/or Vulnerability total scores (reliable change index, 90% confidence interval; Jacobsen & Truax, 1991). While these findings are promising, a strong need exists for further research on the START:AV, the measurement of change, and on the role of strengths in risk assessment and treatment-planning.

Suicide risk among violent and sexual criminal offenders

Risk of suicide in people who have perpetrated specific forms of violent or sexual criminal offenses has not been quantified accurately or precisely. Also, gender comparisons have not been possible due to sparse data problems in the smaller studies that have been conducted to date. We therefore aimed to estimate these effects in the whole Danish population over a 26-year period. By completely interlinking national criminal, psychiatric, sociodemographic and cause-specific mortality registers, we conducted a nested case-control study of more than 27,000 adult suicides, during 1981-2006, and more than half a million age and gender-matched living controls. Elevated suicide risk was found in male sexual offenders. Risk was even higher among violent offenders, with greater effect sizes seen in females. It was markedly raised with serious violence, reaching a peak in relation to homicide or attempted homicide: male odds ratio (OR) 12.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) [8.3, 17.3]; female OR 30.9, CI [11.9, 80.6]. Following adjustment for psychiatric and social risk factors, relative risk in violent offenders was comparable to that seen among nonviolent offenders. These findings underline the importance of understanding why some people are violent toward themselves as well as other people, and why suicide risk is so much higher in people who have perpetrated serious acts of violence. They also indicate a clear need for developing effective multiagency interventions that effectively tackle both forms of destructive behavior.

Using dynamic risk and protective factors to predict inpatient aggression: reliability and validity of START assessments

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START; C. D. Webster, M. L. Martin, J. Brink, T. L. Nicholls, & S. L. Desmarais, 2009; C. D. Webster, M. L. Martin, J. Brink, T. L. Nicholls, & C. Middleton, 2004) is a relatively new structured professional judgment guide for the assessment and management of short-term risks associated with mental, substance use, and personality disorders. The scheme may be distinguished from other violence risk assessment instruments because of its inclusion of 20 dynamic factors that are rated in terms of both vulnerability and strength. This study examined the reliability and validity of START assessments in predicting inpatient aggression. Research assistants completed START assessments for 120 male forensic psychiatric patients through review of hospital files. They also completed Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20; C. D. Webster, K. S. Douglas, D. Eaves, & S. D. Hart, 1997) and Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) assessments. Outcome data were coded from hospital files for a 12-month follow-up period using the Overt Aggression Scale (OAS; S. C. Yudofsky, J. M. Silver, W. Jackson, J. Endicott, & D. W. Williams, 1986). START assessments evidenced excellent interrater reliability and demonstrated both predictive and incremental validity over the HCR-20 Historical subscale scores and PCL:SV total scores. Overall, results support the reliability and validity of START assessments and use of the structured professional judgment approach more broadly, as well as the value of using dynamic risk and protective factors to assess violence risk.

Operationalizing the assessment and management of violence risk in the short-term

Assessing risk of violence in the short term is crucial for managing and preventing violence, especially in institutions such as psychiatric units and prisons. Despite a lack of consensus on the definition of "short term", a number of recent tools and guidelines have been developed to aid short-term clinical decision-making. Whereas the supporting evidence for the new tools is impressive, limitations remain in terms of the focus on prediction, limited consideration of strengths, and poor integration with formulation and risk management. The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) is a brief clinical guide for the dynamic assessment of risks, strengths and treatability. It focuses on short-term risks and the characteristics of the individual that, if changed, might lead to an increase or decrease in risk. The START has the potential to operationalize the structured professional judgment (SPJ) approach in order to inform the evaluation of multiple risk domains relevant to everyday psychiatric clinical practice. However, explicit guidance on integrating risk assessment, formulation and management is limited in the START and this paper describes the SPJ approach, reviews recent developments in approaches to risk, and considers how the START can be used to inform SPJ approaches and link risk assessment, formulation, and management.

Characteristics of START assessments completed in mental health jail diversion programs

Many different instruments have been developed to assist in the assessment of risk for violence and other criminal behavior. However, there is limited evidence regarding how these instruments work in the 'real world'. Even less is known about how these instruments might work for assessing risk in jail diversion populations, whether in research or practice. To address these knowledge gaps, the present study examined the characteristics of risk assessments completed by program staff (n=10) on 96 mental health jail diversion clients (72 men and 24 women) using the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START). The findings provide preliminary support for the reliability and validity of START assessments completed in jail diversion programs, the first evidence of the transportability of START outside psychiatric settings, and further evidence regarding the reliability and validity of START assessments completed in the field. They additionally support the consideration of an eighth, general offending risk domain in START assessments.

Violence risk: re-defining variables from the first-person perspective

Over the past 25 years, there have been notable advances in violence risk assessment of mentally ill individuals using actuarial methods to define high versus low risk groups. A focus on readily observable risk factors, however, has led to a relative neglect of how the offender's subjective states may be valuable to consider in research on the ongoing assessment and prevention of violence. We argue for the relevance of considering idiographic features of subjective experience in the development of structured assessment methods. We then identify three heuristic groups of existing constructs related to aggressive and illegal behavior that may capture modifiable, time-varying aspects of mental functioning leading up to involvement in an act of violence. These hypothesized domains are: (i) construal of intent and cause; (ii) normative reference points; and (iii) emotion recognition and regulation. We suggest that risk state for violence can be studied in a parsimonious and direct manner through systematic research on coded speech samples. The coding method for such an assessment procedure would be almost identical to existing structured clinical judgment instruments with the difference that variables be defined from a first-person point of view. Some implications of this approach for the tertiary prevention of violence in high-risk individuals are described.

The role of warning behaviors in threat assessment: an exploration and suggested typology

The concept of warning behaviors offers an additional perspective in threat assessment. Warning behaviors are acts which constitute evidence of increasing or accelerating risk. They are acute, dynamic, and particularly toxic changes in patterns of behavior which may aid in structuring a professional's judgment that an individual of concern now poses a threat - whether the actual target has been identified or not. They require an operational response. A typology of eight warning behaviors for assessing the threat of intended violence is proposed: pathway, fixation, identification, novel aggression, energy burst, leakage, directly communicated threat, and last resort warning behaviors. Previous research on risk factors associated with such warning behaviors is reviewed, and examples of each warning behavior from various intended violence cases are presented, including public figure assassination, adolescent and adult mass murder, corporate celebrity stalking, and both domestic and foreign acts of terrorism. Practical applications and future research into warning behaviors are suggested.

Resilience and successful community reintegration among female forensic psychiatric patients: a preliminary investigation

Research on resiliency and recovery in forensic psychiatric patients is still limited. Information pertaining to factors associated with successful community reintegration would contribute to a more comprehensive assessment of functioning and informed treatment planning that fits within a recovery approach of service provision. Using a retrospective design involving file reviews and a 3-year follow-up period, the authors investigated the rate of successful/unsuccessful community reintegration (defined by the presence or absence of an absolute discharge/readmission to hospital) in female forensic psychiatric patients (N = 48). The study evaluated the extent to which the risk and protective factors captured in the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) predicted a range of positive and negative outcomes in the study sample. Results showed that 47.9% of the women qualified as having successfully reintegrated into the community, with the remaining 52.1% qualifying as still being in recovery. Successful individuals possessed significantly more protective factors and significantly fewer risk factors than individuals still in recovery. Furthermore, both the vulnerability and the strength scale of the START demonstrated good predictive validity, however we did not find evidence of incremental validity of the strength scale.

The Short- to Medium-Term Predictive Accuracy of Static and Dynamic Risk Assessment Measures in a Secure Forensic Hospital

Although violence risk assessment knowledge and practice has advanced over the past few decades, it remains practically difficult to decide which measures clinicians should use to assess and make decisions about the violence potential of individuals on an ongoing basis, particularly in the short to medium term. Within this context, this study sought to compare the predictive accuracy of dynamic risk assessment measures for violence with static risk assessment measures over the short term (up to 1 month) and medium term (up to 6 months) in a forensic psychiatric inpatient setting. Results showed that dynamic measures were generally more accurate than static measures for short- to medium-term predictions of inpatient aggression. These findings highlight the necessity of using risk assessment measures that are sensitive to important clinical risk state variables to improve the short- to medium-term prediction of aggression within the forensic inpatient setting. Such knowledge can assist with the development of more accurate and efficient risk assessment procedures, including the selection of appropriate risk assessment instruments to manage and prevent the violence of offenders with mental illnesses during inpatient treatment.

To detain or to release? Correlates of dispositions for individuals declared not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder

OBJECTIVE

The extent to which risk assessment advances have influenced release decision-making by review boards (RBs) of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD) remains unclear. Our objective is to identify the psychosocial, criminological, and risk measure correlates of RB decision-making.

METHOD

Data were collected through structured interviews and file reviews conducted between October 2004 and August 2006 in the sole forensic psychiatric hospital in Quebec and in 2 civil psychiatric hospitals in a large metropolitan area designated to care for people found NCRMD. The final sample consisted of 96 men.

RESULTS

Dynamic, clinical risk factors are associated with decisions to detain or release people found NCRMD, rather than traditional historical risk factors such as criminal history.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic variables seem appropriate for the RBs to consider given the intention of the NCRMD legislation. Further, dynamic variables provide direction for titration of treatment and supervision. Results are discussed regarding enhancing evidence-informed RB dispositions.

The first step in the validation of a new screen for violence risk in acute psychiatry: The inpatient context

BACKGROUND

Instruments for evaluating the risk of violence towards others have mostly been developed for assessment of risk for recidivism into violent crime in forensic psychiatry. In general psychiatry there is a considerable need for specialised, brief and structured assessment tools to inform risk decisions.

METHOD

The study aimed to validate a brief structured clinical risk assessment screen of inpatient violence (V-RISK-10), a 10-item structured clinical checklist with a good vignette-based interrater reliability (ICC=0.87). In this study it was used for risk assessment of a one-year sample of patients (N=1.017) admitted to two acute psychiatric units. Risk assessments at admission were compared to prospective records of aggressive and violent acts during the hospital stay.

RESULTS

Results showed a base rate for aggression of 9%. The predictive validity of the V-RISK-10 was estimated by Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC). It yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83, with sensitivity/specificity of 0.81/0.73 and corresponding positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) of 0.24/0.97. The screen was easy-to-use and showed a short completion time.

CONCLUSION

Despite promising results further validation studies are required before the V-RISK-10 is adopted into routine clinical practise.

A narrative review of the effectiveness of aggression management training programs for psychiatric hospital staff

Workplace violence, including patient-perpetrated violence in healthcare settings, is increasingly being recognized as preventable. Staff training has been identified as a necessary component of any initiative aimed at preventing or reducing incidents of aggression and violence in the workplace. This narrative review of the literature evaluates the effectiveness of staff training programs designed to prevent and manage violence and aggression in psychiatric hospitals. An exhaustive review of the literature was performed on all articles published in English between January 1, 1990 and April 1, 2007 that evaluate an aggression management training program. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria for a full review and were summarized using a qualitative narrative approach. Aggression management training has been proven effective in some areas, such as reducing the use of restraints and other coercive control devices, but more methodologically rigorous research is needed to firmly establish whether it is effective in reducing aggression and staff injuries.

IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this study suggest that relying too heavily on aggression management staff training will have limited effect on addressing the range of issues related to patient-perpetrated violence in psychiatric hospitals. Mental healthcare organizations must look beyond staff training if they are to achieve meaningful reductions in aggressive incidents and staff injuries.

The prediction of imminent aggression in patients with mental illness and/or intellectual disability using the Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression instrument

Objective: The aim of this paper was to determine whether imminent aggression in psychiatric inpatients can be accurately predicted using a structured risk assessment instrument, the Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression (DASA). Methods: This prospective validation study involved 10 013 DASA risk assessments of patients residing in a psychiatric hospital. Twenty-four hours after the risk assessment, psychiatric nurses documented whether patients had behaved aggressively towards others or whether they had deliberately damaged property. They also noted the target of aggression, whether towards staff, patients or property. Results: The predictive validity of the DASA varied according to the type and target of aggression. The prediction of any aggressive behaviour, irrespective of type of aggression or target, was significantly greater than chance (AUC = 0.69). The strongest predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.80) was for physical aggression towards staff. Conclusions: These results suggest that imminent aggression in psychiatric hospitals may be able to be accurately predicted by psychiatric nurses using a structured risk assessment instrument.

Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the Behavioural Status Index: a nurse-rated forensic assessment tool

The Behavioural Status Index (BEST-Index) has been introduced into Dutch forensic psychiatry to measure change in risk level of future violence. The BEST-Index is a structured observational measure that assesses aggressive behavior, degree of insight, social skills, self-care, and work and leisure skills during inpatient treatment. Thus far, limited information regarding the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the BEST-Index is available. The present study examines the reliability and validity of the Dutch BEST-Index in a sample of 291 mentally disordered offenders admitted to a forensic psychiatric hospital. Interrater reliability was investigated in a sample of 182 raters. Findings show that the Dutch BEST-Index can be used reliably and is significantly associated with risk of future violence and institutional aggression. Furthermore, this study revealed a different and clearer factor structure compared with the original one. Further research is needed to examine how these derived factors predict future recidivism.

Assessing comorbid substance use in detained psychiatric patients: issues and instruments for evaluating treatment outcome

This review assesses the issues involved in the selection and treatment of patients comorbid for mental illness and substance misuse being treated in secure psychiatric facilities. It includes those individuals who have a history of offending and whose placement is the result of severe behavioral disturbance. The relevant issues in the assessment and treatment of these patients are reviewed and a battery of tests is suggested on the basis of their usefulness with this population in terms of their brevity, ease of administration, and for their value in planning treatment, providing motivational feedback, and monitoring change. The paucity of assessment tools developed specifically for this patient population is highlighted.

Research issues in forensic psychiatry

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Forensic psychiatry is a multidisciplinary specialty within the context of criminal and civil law. This paper reviews a broad spectrum of research areas within the forensic psychiatric field, covering publications in 2006.

RECENT FINDINGS

New developments can be divided into four subject areas. The first relates to risk assessment, the second to the epidemiology of violence, the third refers to treatment outcome studies, and the fourth relates to topics of interest within different offender groups.

SUMMARY

There seems to be a growing interest in specifying the needs of different offender groups, such as intellectually-disabled patients, adolescents and women. When it comes to effective treatment models for these subgroups, however, it is not always clear if sufficient attention is paid to the presence of comorbid disorders and their consequences, even in research publications.

Assessment of interpersonal aggression and violence: introduction to the special issue

Violence and interpersonal aggression are considered major public health problems throughout the world. Yet there is considerable variability in how these terms are operationalized, measured, and studied in the social sciences, which can lead to ambiguity and confusion in the field. In this introduction to the special issue, the authors highlight some of the difficulties inherent in studying interpersonal aggression and violence and briefly review the heterogeneous nature of the research conducted in this area. The authors conclude with a summary of the key findings of the articles that appear in this special issue.

Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START): The case for a new structured professional judgment scheme

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) is a new structured professional judgment scheme intended to inform multiple risk domains relevant to everyday psychiatric clinical practice (e.g. risk to others, suicide, self-harm, self-neglect, substance abuse, unauthorized leave, and victimization). The article describes the processes involved in establishing an interdisciplinary approach to risk assessment and management. The authors present a review of the rationale for START, including the value of dynamic variables, the importance of strengths, and the extent to which clinicians must be attentive to multiple risk domains, reflecting theoretical and scientific evidence of the overlap among risks. Using the development, validation, and implementation of START as an example, the authors describe the processes by which other researchers, clinicians, and administrators could adapt existing assessment schemes or create new ones to bridge some remaining gaps in the risk assessment and management continuum.