Structured professional judgement approach to risk assessment: generalisability across patient groups for the prediction of adverse outcomes in secure mental health care

This is a redacted version of the the final thesis. Copyright material has been removed to comply with UK Copyright Law.

Role of assessment components and recent adverse outcomes in risk estimation and prediction: use of the Short Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) in an adult secure inpatient mental health service

The Short Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability is a structured judgement tool used to inform risk estimation for multiple adverse outcomes. In research, risk estimates outperform the tool's strength and vulnerability scales for violence prediction. Little is known about what its’component parts contribute to the assignment of risk estimates and how those estimates fare in prediction of non-violent adverse outcomes compared with the structured components. START assessment and outcomes data from a secure mental health service (N=84) was collected. Binomial and multinomial regression analyses determined the contribution of selected elements of the START structured domain and recent adverse risk events to risk estimates and outcomes prediction for violence, self-harm/suicidality, victimisation, and self-neglect. START vulnerabilities and lifetime history of violence, predicted the violence risk estimate; self-harm and victimisation estimates were predicted only by corresponding recent adverse events. Recent adverse events uniquely predicted all corresponding outcomes, with the exception of self-neglect which was predicted by the strength scale. Only for victimisation did the risk estimate outperform prediction based on the START components and recent adverse events. In the absence of recent corresponding risk behaviour, restrictions imposed on the basis of START-informed risk estimates could be unwarranted and may be unethical.

Performance of protective factors assessment in risk prediction for adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Protective factors are neglected in risk assessment in adult psychiatric and criminal justice populations. This review investigated the predictive efficacy of selected tools that assess protective factors. Five databases were searched using comprehensive terms for records up to June 2014, resulting in 17 studies (n = 2,198). Results were combined in a multilevel meta-analysis using the R (R Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2015) metafor package (Viechtbauer, Journal of Statistical Software, 2010, 36, 1). Prediction of outcomes was poor relative to a reference category of violent offending, with the exception of prediction of discharge from secure units. There were no significant differences between the predictive efficacy of risk scales, protective scales, and summary judgments. Protective factor assessment may be clinically useful, but more development is required. Claims that use of these tools is therapeutically beneficial require testing.