119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38764372)
1. Risk and protective factors in risk assessment: Predicting inpatient aggression in adult males detained in a forensic mental health setting.
Ireland JL; Levtova Y; Abi Semaan CM; Steene LMB; Henrich S; Gaylor L; Driemel L; Volz S; Homann J; Dickopf M; Greenwood L; Chu S
Aggress Behav; 2024 May; 50(3):e22150. PubMed ID: 38764372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Susceptibility (risk and protective) factors for in-patient violence and self-harm: prospective study of structured professional judgement instruments START and SAPROF, DUNDRUM-3 and DUNDRUM-4 in forensic mental health services.
Abidin Z; Davoren M; Naughton L; Gibbons O; Nulty A; Kennedy HG
BMC Psychiatry; 2013 Jul; 13():197. PubMed ID: 23890106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Differential predictive validity of the Historical, Clinical and Risk Management Scales (HCR-20) for inpatient aggression.
O'Shea LE; Picchioni MM; Mason FL; Sugarman PA; Dickens GL
Psychiatry Res; 2014 Dec; 220(1-2):669-78. PubMed ID: 25150922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Strength-based assessment for future violence risk: a retrospective validation study of the Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF) Japanese version in forensic psychiatric inpatients.
Kashiwagi H; Kikuchi A; Koyama M; Saito D; Hirabayashi N
Ann Gen Psychiatry; 2018; 17():5. PubMed ID: 29422940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Predictors of Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) outcome in a forensic inpatient population: a prospective cohort study.
Jewell A; Dean K; Fahy T; Cullen AE
BMC Psychiatry; 2017 Jan; 17(1):25. PubMed ID: 28095806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Development and evaluation of a de-escalation training intervention in adult acute and forensic units: the EDITION systematic review and feasibility trial.
Price O; Papastavrou Brooks C; Johnston I; McPherson P; Goodman H; Grundy A; Cree L; Motala Z; Robinson J; Doyle M; Stokes N; Armitage CJ; Barley E; Brooks H; Callaghan P; Carter LA; Davies LM; Drake RJ; Lovell K; Bee P
Health Technol Assess; 2024 Jan; 28(3):1-120. PubMed ID: 38343036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Self-harm as a risk factor for inpatient aggression among women admitted to forensic psychiatric care.
Selenius H; Leppänen Östman S; Strand S
Nord J Psychiatry; 2016 Oct; 70(7):554-60. PubMed ID: 27224513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing Protective Factors for Violence Risk in U.K. General Mental Health Services Using the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors.
Haines A; Brown A; Javaid SF; Khan F; Noblett S; Omodunbi O; Sadiq K; Zaman W; Whittington R
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2018 Sep; 62(12):3965-3983. PubMed ID: 29284378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Using dynamic risk and protective factors to predict inpatient aggression: reliability and validity of START assessments.
Desmarais SL; Nicholls TL; Wilson CM; Brink J
Psychol Assess; 2012 Sep; 24(3):685-700. PubMed ID: 22250595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Predictive validity of dynamic factors: assessing violence risk in forensic psychiatric inpatients.
Wilson CM; Desmarais SL; Nicholls TL; Hart SD; Brink J
Law Hum Behav; 2013 Dec; 37(6):377-88. PubMed ID: 23815092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Predictive validity of the HCR-20 for inpatient self-harm.
O'Shea LE; Picchioni MM; Mason FL; Sugarman PA; Dickens GL
Compr Psychiatry; 2014 Nov; 55(8):1937-49. PubMed ID: 25104612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Changes in dynamic risk and protective factors for violence during inpatient forensic psychiatric treatment: predicting reductions in postdischarge community recidivism.
De Vries Robbé M; de Vogel V; Douglas KS; Nijman HL
Law Hum Behav; 2015 Feb; 39(1):53-61. PubMed ID: 24933171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessing protective factors for sexually violent offending with the SAPROF.
de Vries Robbé M; de Vogel V; Koster K; Bogaerts S
Sex Abuse; 2015 Feb; 27(1):51-70. PubMed ID: 25210106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessing risk for aggression in forensic psychiatric inpatients: An examination of five measures.
Hogan NR; Olver ME
Law Hum Behav; 2016 Jun; 40(3):233-43. PubMed ID: 26828708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the Risk of Inpatient Violence in Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Girardi A; Hancock-Johnson E; Thomas C; Wallang PM
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2019 Dec; 47(4):427-436. PubMed ID: 31554646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Predictive validity of HCR-20, START, and static-99R assessments in predicting institutional aggression among sexual offenders.
Cartwright JK; Desmarais SL; Hazel J; Griffith T; Azizian A
Law Hum Behav; 2018 Feb; 42(1):13-25. PubMed ID: 28857580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predictive validity of the HCR-20 for inpatient aggression: the effect of intellectual disability on accuracy.
O'Shea LE; Picchioni MM; McCarthy J; Mason FL; Dickens GL
J Intellect Disabil Res; 2015 Nov; 59(11):1042-54. PubMed ID: 25683589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Validating the Hamilton Anatomy of Risk Management-Forensic Version and the Aggressive Incidents Scale.
Cook AN; Moulden HM; Mamak M; Lalani S; Messina K; Chaimowitz G
Assessment; 2018 Jun; 25(4):432-445. PubMed ID: 27422806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Evaluation of the HCR-20 Violence Risk Assessment Scheme in a Belgian forensic population].
Claix A; Pham TH
Encephale; 2004; 30(5):447-53. PubMed ID: 15627049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Predicting aggression during the treatment of forensic psychiatric patients by means of the HCR-20].
Mudde N; Nijman H; van der Hulst W; van den Bout J
Tijdschr Psychiatr; 2011; 53(10):705-13. PubMed ID: 21989749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
