Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assessing risk for inpatient physical violence in a female forensic psychiatric sample - comparing HCR-20v2 with the female additional manual to the HCR-20v2
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Special Education.
Number of Authors: 22019 (English)In: Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, ISSN 0803-9488, E-ISSN 1502-4725, Vol. 73, no 4-5, p. 248-256Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose and aim: Out from the sparse literature on risk assessment for violence committed by women the Female Additional Manual (FAM) was developed to be a complement to the HCR-20v2. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the psychometrics of the HCR-20v2 with and without the FAM on risk for inpatient physical violence for female forensic psychiatric patients.Methods: The participants were 100 female patients admitted to forensic psychiatric care in a high-security clinic, assessed by clinicians with the HCR-20v2 during their admission. Researchers performed the FAM, both retrospectively and prospectively. The follow-up period was 12months before being discharged.Results: Four main results were found; first, many risk factors were present although the summary risk ratings were mainly low to moderate. Secondly, the reliability was in general good, where the HCR-20v2 mainly showed higher reliability without than with the FAM, indicating that FAM risk factors did equal or did not contribute to a higher reliability. Third, the internal validity was higher for the HCR-20v2 than for the FAM. Risk factors correlated stronger with the summary risk ratings for the HCR-20v2 than for the FAM. Fourth, the validity for inpatient physical violence was high for the total score of both the HCR-20v2 and the FAM, but contradictory to previous finding the validity for summary risk ratings was not significant.Conclusions: The results support the use of HCR-20v2 when assessing risk for inpatient violence for female forensic psychiatric patients, but with only some support for adding or changing risk factors according to the FAM.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 73, no 4-5, p. 248-256
Keywords [en]
Risk assessment, inpatient violence, female patients, forensic psychiatric care
National Category
Psychiatry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-170776DOI: 10.1080/08039488.2019.1613447ISI: 000473477000006PubMedID: 31081436OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-170776DiVA, id: diva2:1338389
Available from: 2019-07-22 Created: 2019-07-22 Last updated: 2019-07-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Selenius, Heidi
By organisation
Department of Special Education
In the same journal
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry
Psychiatry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf