The predictive performance of criminal risk assessment tools used at sentencing : Systematic review of validation studies

Thumbnail Image
Date
2022
Authors
Fazel, Seena
Fanshawe, Thomas
Gil, Sharon Danielle
Monahan, John
Yu, Rongqin
Editors
Contact
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
ArXiv-ID
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Collections
Restricted until
Title in another language
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Publication type
Journal article
Publication status
Published
Published in
Journal of Criminal Justice ; 81 (2022). - 101902. - Elsevier. - ISSN 0047-2352. - eISSN 1873-6203
Abstract
Although risk assessment tools have been widely used to inform sentencing decisions, there is uncertainty about the extent and quality of evidence of their predictive performance when validated in new samples. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of validation studies of 11 commonly used risk assessment tools for sentencing. We identified 36 studies with 597,665 participants, among which were 27 independent validation studies with 177,711 individuals. Overall, the predictive performance of the included risk assessment tools was mixed, and ranged from poor to moderate. Tool performance was typically overestimated in studies with smaller sample sizes or studies in which tool developers were co-authors. Most studies only reported area under the curve (AUC), which ranged from 0.57 to 0.75 in independent studies with more than 500 participants. The majority did not report key performance measures, such as calibration and rates of false positives and negatives. In addition, most validation studies had a high risk of bias, partly due to inappropriate analytical approach used. We conclude that the research priority is for future investigations to address the key methodological shortcomings identified in this review, and policy makers should enable this research. More sufficiently powered independent validation studies are necessary.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
150 Psychology
Keywords
Sentencing, Recidivism, Risk prediction, Risk assessment
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690FAZEL, Seena, Matthias BURGHART, Thomas FANSHAWE, Sharon Danielle GIL, John MONAHAN, Rongqin YU, 2022. The predictive performance of criminal risk assessment tools used at sentencing : Systematic review of validation studies. In: Journal of Criminal Justice. Elsevier. 81, 101902. ISSN 0047-2352. eISSN 1873-6203. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.101902
BibTex
@article{Fazel2022-07predi-58290,
  year={2022},
  doi={10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.101902},
  title={The predictive performance of criminal risk assessment tools used at sentencing : Systematic review of validation studies},
  volume={81},
  issn={0047-2352},
  journal={Journal of Criminal Justice},
  author={Fazel, Seena and Burghart, Matthias and Fanshawe, Thomas and Gil, Sharon Danielle and Monahan, John and Yu, Rongqin},
  note={Article Number: 101902}
}
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/123456789/58290">
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/58290/1/Fazel_2-359d0sns79mo1.pdf"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-08-16T07:43:07Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Although risk assessment tools have been widely used to inform sentencing decisions, there is uncertainty about the extent and quality of evidence of their predictive performance when validated in new samples. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of validation studies of 11 commonly used risk assessment tools for sentencing. We identified 36 studies with 597,665 participants, among which were 27 independent validation studies with 177,711 individuals. Overall, the predictive performance of the included risk assessment tools was mixed, and ranged from poor to moderate. Tool performance was typically overestimated in studies with smaller sample sizes or studies in which tool developers were co-authors. Most studies only reported area under the curve (AUC), which ranged from 0.57 to 0.75 in independent studies with more than 500 participants. The majority did not report key performance measures, such as calibration and rates of false positives and negatives. In addition, most validation studies had a high risk of bias, partly due to inappropriate analytical approach used. We conclude that the research priority is for future investigations to address the key methodological shortcomings identified in this review, and policy makers should enable this research. More sufficiently powered independent validation studies are necessary.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:contributor>Gil, Sharon Danielle</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Yu, Rongqin</dc:contributor>
    <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/"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2022-07</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:title>The predictive performance of criminal risk assessment tools used at sentencing : Systematic review of validation studies</dcterms:title>
    <dc:creator>Yu, Rongqin</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Burghart, Matthias</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Monahan, John</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Gil, Sharon Danielle</dc:creator>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Fazel, Seena</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Monahan, John</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-08-16T07:43:07Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:contributor>Fanshawe, Thomas</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Burghart, Matthias</dc:creator>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/58290/1/Fazel_2-359d0sns79mo1.pdf"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/58290"/>
    <dc:creator>Fazel, Seena</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Fanshawe, Thomas</dc:creator>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Contact
URL of original publication
Test date of URL
Examination date of dissertation
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
Yes
Refereed
Yes