Publikation: An updated evidence synthesis on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model : Umbrella review and commentary
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
Purpose: To conduct an umbrella review of Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) principles by synthesizing and appraising the consistency and quality of the underlying evidence base of RNR. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched three bibliographic databases, the Cochrane Library, and grey literature from 2002 to 2022 for systematic reviews and meta-analysis on RNR principles. We summarized effect sizes, including as odds ratios and Area Under the Curve (AUC) statistic. We evaluated the quality of review evidence by examining risk of bias, excess statistical significance, between-study heterogeneity, and calculated prediction intervals for reported effect sizes. Results: We identified 26 unique meta-anlayses that examined RNR principles. These meta-analyses indicate inconsistent statistical support for the individual components of RNR. For the risk principle, there were links with recidivism (OR = 1.6, 95% CI [1.1, 2.3]). For the need principle, although there were associations between adherence to intervention programs and recidivism, risk assessment tools reflecting this principle had low predictive accuracy (AUCs 0.62–0.64). The general and specific responsivity principles received some support. However, the overall quality of the evidence was poor as indicated by potential authorship bias, lack of transparency, substandard primary research, limited subgroup analyses, and conflation of prediction with causality. Conclusion: The prevalent poor quality evidence and identified biases suggests that higher quality research is needed to determine whether current RNR claims of being evidence-based are justified.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
FAZEL, Seena, Connie HURTON, Matthias BURGHART, Matt DELISI, Rongqin YU, 2024. An updated evidence synthesis on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model : Umbrella review and commentary. In: Journal of Criminal Justice. Elsevier. 2024, 92, 102197. ISSN 0047-2352. Verfügbar unter: doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2024.102197BibTex
@article{Fazel2024-05updat-70275, year={2024}, doi={10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2024.102197}, title={An updated evidence synthesis on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model : Umbrella review and commentary}, volume={92}, issn={0047-2352}, journal={Journal of Criminal Justice}, author={Fazel, Seena and Hurton, Connie and Burghart, Matthias and DeLisi, Matt and Yu, Rongqin}, note={Article Number: 102197} }
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/123456789/70275"> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dc:creator>Yu, Rongqin</dc:creator> <dc:contributor>DeLisi, Matt</dc:contributor> <dcterms:issued>2024-05</dcterms:issued> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2024-06-28T08:30:49Z</dc:date> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/70275/1/Fazel_2-1gxsgdetrjoyb2.pdf"/> <dcterms:abstract>Purpose: To conduct an umbrella review of Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) principles by synthesizing and appraising the consistency and quality of the underlying evidence base of RNR. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched three bibliographic databases, the Cochrane Library, and grey literature from 2002 to 2022 for systematic reviews and meta-analysis on RNR principles. We summarized effect sizes, including as odds ratios and Area Under the Curve (AUC) statistic. We evaluated the quality of review evidence by examining risk of bias, excess statistical significance, between-study heterogeneity, and calculated prediction intervals for reported effect sizes. Results: We identified 26 unique meta-anlayses that examined RNR principles. These meta-analyses indicate inconsistent statistical support for the individual components of RNR. For the risk principle, there were links with recidivism (OR = 1.6, 95% CI [1.1, 2.3]). For the need principle, although there were associations between adherence to intervention programs and recidivism, risk assessment tools reflecting this principle had low predictive accuracy (AUCs 0.62–0.64). The general and specific responsivity principles received some support. However, the overall quality of the evidence was poor as indicated by potential authorship bias, lack of transparency, substandard primary research, limited subgroup analyses, and conflation of prediction with causality. Conclusion: The prevalent poor quality evidence and identified biases suggests that higher quality research is needed to determine whether current RNR claims of being evidence-based are justified.</dcterms:abstract> <dc:contributor>Yu, Rongqin</dc:contributor> <dc:contributor>Hurton, Connie</dc:contributor> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/70275/1/Fazel_2-1gxsgdetrjoyb2.pdf"/> <dc:creator>DeLisi, Matt</dc:creator> <dc:contributor>Burghart, Matthias</dc:contributor> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/70275"/> <dc:creator>Burghart, Matthias</dc:creator> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2024-06-28T08:30:49Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:title>An updated evidence synthesis on the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model : Umbrella review and commentary</dcterms:title> <dc:creator>Fazel, Seena</dc:creator> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dc:creator>Hurton, Connie</dc:creator> <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:contributor>Fazel, Seena</dc:contributor> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>