Protective Factors in Violence Risk Assessment: Predictive Validity of the SAPROF and HCR-20V3

Clare Neil, Suzanne O’Rourke, Nuno Ferreira, Liz Flynn

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    2 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Research and practice in violence risk assessment in forensic mental health primarily focuses on risk factors; however consideration of protective factors may improve the accuracy and utility of assessments. Using a pseudo-prospective design, the predictive and incremental validity of protective factors was explored using the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors (SAPROF) and Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 (HCR-20V3) in 75 male inpatients in a secure setting. Over a 12-month period, protective factors significantly predicted the absence of inpatient (institutional) violence and risk factors, particularly dynamic factors, predicted the presence of violence. Hierarchical logistic regression did not establish the incremental validity of the SAPROF. Preliminary evidence for the predictive and incremental validity of the Integrative Final Risk Judgment was found with individuals judged high risk being almost seven times more likely to engage in violence than those assessed as moderate risk. High risk ratings were associated with fewer protective factors and more risk factors. Therefore, whilst dynamic risk factors are clear targets for risk management, consideration of protective factors may contribute to overall estimates of risk and provide additional targets for intervention.

    Original languageEnglish
    JournalInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2019

    Keywords

    • assessment
    • HCR-20
    • protective factors
    • SAPROF
    • Violence risk

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Protective Factors in Violence Risk Assessment: Predictive Validity of the SAPROF and HCR-20<sup>V3</sup>'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this