These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31957511)

  • 1. Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II in an Australian Context.
    Molnar T; Allard T; McKillop N; Rynne J
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2022 Aug; 66(10-11):1051-1070. PubMed ID: 31957511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessing youth who sexually offended: the predictive validity of the ERASOR, J-SOAP-II, and YLS/CMI in a non-Western context.
    Chu CM; Ng K; Fong J; Teoh J
    Sex Abuse; 2012 Apr; 24(2):153-74. PubMed ID: 21825111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Validity and Reliability of the Violence Risk Scale-Youth Sexual Offense Version.
    Rojas EY; Olver ME
    Sex Abuse; 2020 Oct; 32(7):826-849. PubMed ID: 31248327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The Influence of Age and Sexual Drive on the Predictive Validity of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-Revised.
    Wijetunga C; Martinez R; Rosenfeld B; Cruise K
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2018 Jan; 62(1):150-169. PubMed ID: 27255236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Long-Term Predictive Validity of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II: Research and Practice Implications.
    Schwartz-Mette RA; Righthand S; Hecker J; Dore G; Huff R
    Sex Abuse; 2020 Aug; 32(5):499-520. PubMed ID: 30714853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Predicting sexual and nonsexual recidivism in a consecutive sample of juveniles convicted of sexual offences.
    Aebi M; Plattner B; Steinhausen HC; Bessler C
    Sex Abuse; 2011 Dec; 23(4):456-73. PubMed ID: 21406605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Testing the validity of criminal risk assessment tools in sexually abusive youth.
    Barra S; Bessler C; Landolt MA; Aebi M
    Psychol Assess; 2018 Nov; 30(11):1430-1443. PubMed ID: 29792506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Are Juveniles Who Have Committed Sexual Offenses the Same Everywhere? Psychometric Properties of the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II in a Portuguese Youth Sample.
    Barroso R; Pechorro P; Ramião E; Figueiredo P; Manita C; Gonçalves RA; Nobre P
    Sex Abuse; 2020 Oct; 32(7):806-825. PubMed ID: 31221049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Validation of the YLS/CMI on an Australian Juvenile Offending Population.
    Dellar K; Roberts L; Bullen J; Downe K; Kane R
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2023 Jun; 67(8):861-883. PubMed ID: 35414291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sexual Violence Risk Assessment With Indigenous Men: Context, Controversies, and Current Findings.
    Olver ME; Stockdale KC
    Curr Psychiatry Rep; 2021 Jul; 23(8):48. PubMed ID: 34196806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Review of risk assessment instruments for juvenile sex offenders: what is next?
    Hempel I; Buck N; Cima M; van Marle H
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2013 Feb; 57(2):208-28. PubMed ID: 22147101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Validity of Risk Assessment Instruments Among Juveniles Who Sexually Offended: Victim Age Matters.
    Krause C; Roth A; Landolt MA; Bessler C; Aebi M
    Sex Abuse; 2021 Jun; 33(4):379-405. PubMed ID: 32172652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Short-term predictive validity of the static-99 and static-99-R for indigenous and nonindigenous Australian sexual offenders.
    Smallbone S; Rallings M
    Sex Abuse; 2013 Jun; 25(3):302-16. PubMed ID: 23389506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Forensic Experts' Perspectives on Australian Indigenous Sexual Offenders and Factors Important in Evaluating the Risk of Recidivism.
    Allan A; Parry CL; Tubex H; Spiranovic C; Morgan F
    Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2021 Nov; 65(15):1653-1675. PubMed ID: 33131356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Development and Validation of the Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II.
    Epperson DL; Ralston CA
    Sex Abuse; 2015 Dec; 27(6):529-58. PubMed ID: 24492618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Predictive Validity of the Static-99, Static-99R, and Static-2002/R: Which One to Use?
    Reeves SG; Ogloff JRP; Simmons M
    Sex Abuse; 2018 Dec; 30(8):887-907. PubMed ID: 28597720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Another piece of the puzzle: psychometric properties of the J-SOAP-II.
    Fanniff AM; Letourneau EJ
    Sex Abuse; 2012 Aug; 24(4):378-408. PubMed ID: 22344780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Less Is More: Using Static-2002R Subscales to Predict Violent and General Recidivism Among Sexual Offenders.
    Babchishin KM; Hanson RK; Blais J
    Sex Abuse; 2016 Apr; 28(3):187-217. PubMed ID: 25667228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Actuarial risk assessment of sexual offenders: The psychometric properties of the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG).
    Rettenberger M; Rice ME; Harris GT; Eher R
    Psychol Assess; 2017 Jun; 29(6):624-638. PubMed ID: 28594206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of the predictive properties of nine sex offender risk assessment instruments.
    Smid WJ; Kamphuis JH; Wever EC; Van Beek DJ
    Psychol Assess; 2014 Sep; 26(3):691-703. PubMed ID: 24773035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.