Systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instruments

dc.contributor.authorSchnyder, Nina
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-14T10:37:32Z
dc.date.available2025-03-14T10:37:32Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractWe systematically reviewed the available evidence on the discrimination of four well-established Risk-Assessment Instruments (RAIs) used to estimate the probability of recidivism for general (Level of Service Inventory-Revised; LSI-R), violent (Violence Risk Appraisal Guide; VRAG), sexual (Static-99R), and intimate partner violent offences (Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment; ODARA). We conducted bivariate logit-normal random effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity and false positive rates and modelled the positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) using BRs as reported in a) the construction samples of each RAI and b) recent official statistics and peer-reviewed articles for different offence categories and countries. To assess risk of bias we used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.
dc.description.versionpublisheddeu
dc.identifier.urihttps://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/72670
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subject.ddc150
dc.titleSystematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instrumentseng
dspace.entity.typeDataset
kops.citation.bibtex
kops.citation.iso690SCHNYDER, Nina, 2024. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instrumentsdeu
kops.citation.iso690SCHNYDER, Nina, 2024. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instrumentseng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/72670">
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/71936"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2024</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/71936"/>
    <dc:contributor>Schnyder, Nina</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Schnyder, Nina</dc:creator>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2025-03-14T10:37:32Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:abstract>We systematically reviewed the available evidence on the discrimination of four well-established Risk-Assessment Instruments (RAIs) used to estimate the probability of recidivism for general (Level of Service Inventory-Revised; LSI-R), violent (Violence Risk Appraisal Guide; VRAG), sexual (Static-99R), and intimate partner violent offences (Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment; ODARA). We conducted bivariate logit-normal random effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity and false positive rates and modelled the positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) using BRs as reported in a) the construction samples of each RAI and b) recent official statistics and peer-reviewed articles for different offence categories and countries. To assess risk of bias we used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.</dcterms:abstract>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2025-03-14T10:37:32Z</dcterms:available>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/72670"/>
    <dcterms:title>Systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instruments</dcterms:title>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.datacite.repositoryOpen Science Framework
kops.urlhttps://osf.io/jbgka/
kops.urlDate2025-03-12
relation.isAuthorOfDatasete894f1dc-726d-41d5-ba6c-6a866c6e29c9
relation.isAuthorOfDataset.latestForDiscoverye894f1dc-726d-41d5-ba6c-6a866c6e29c9
relation.isPublicationOfDataset5d6ec9c9-f0fc-4862-9856-6a267042edfd
relation.isPublicationOfDataset.latestForDiscovery5d6ec9c9-f0fc-4862-9856-6a267042edfd
temp.internal.duplicatesitems/5d6ec9c9-f0fc-4862-9856-6a267042edfd;true;The key role of base rates : systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of four risk assessment instruments

Dateien