Development and evaluation of the Clinician Suicide Risk Assessment Checklist

This paper describes the development and evaluation of a new instrument – the Clinician Suicide Risk Assessment Checklist (CSRAC). The instrument assesses the clinician’s competency in three areas: clinical interviewing, assessment of specific suicide risk factors, and formulating a management plan. A draft checklist was constructed by integrating information from 1) literature review 2) expert clinician focus group and 3) consultation with experts. It was utilised in a simulated clinical scenario with clinician trainees and a trained actor in order to test for inter-rater agreement. Agreement was calculated and the checklist was re-drafted with the aim of maximising agreement. A second phase of simulated clinical scenarios was then conducted and inter-rater agreement was calculated for the revised checklist. In the first phase of the study, 18 of 35 items had inadequate inter-rater agreement (60%>), while in the second phase, using the revised version, only 3 of 39 items failed to achieve adequate inter-rater agreement. Further evidence of reliability and validity are required. Continued development of the CSRAC will be necessary before it can be utilised to assess the effectiveness of risk assessment training programs.

Application and evaluation of classification trees for screening unwanted plants

Risk assessment systems for introduced species are being developed and applied globally, but methods for rigorously evaluating them are still in their infancy. We explore classification and regression tree models as an alternative to the current Australian Weed Risk Assessment system, and demonstrate how the performance of screening tests for unwanted alien species may be quantitatively compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The optimal classification tree model for predicting weediness included just four out of a possible 44 attributes of introduced plants examined, namely: (i) intentional human dispersal of propagules; (ii) evidence of naturalization beyond native range; (iii) evidence of being a weed elsewhere; and (iv) a high level of domestication. Intentional human dispersal of propagules in combination with evidence of naturalization beyond a plants native range led to the strongest prediction of weediness. A high level of domestication in combination with no evidence of naturalization mitigated the likelihood of an introduced plant becoming a weed resulting from intentional human dispersal of propagules. Unlikely intentional human dispersal of propagules combined with no evidence of being a weed elsewhere led to the lowest predicted probability of weediness. The failure to include intrinsic plant attributes in the model suggests that either these attributes are not useful general predictors of weediness, or data and analysis were inadequate to elucidate the underlying relationship(s). This concurs with the historical pessimism that we will ever be able to accurately predict invasive plants. Given the apparent importance of propagule pressure (the number of individuals of an species released), future attempts at evaluating screening model performance for identifying unwanted plants need to account for propagule pressure when collating and/or analysing datasets. The classification tree had a cross-validated sensitivity of 93.6% and specificity of 36.7%. Based on the area under the ROC curve, the performance of the classification tree in correctly classifying plants as weeds or non-weeds was slightly inferior (Area under ROC curve = 0.83 +/- 0.021 (+/- SE)) to that of the current risk assessment system in use (Area under ROC curve = 0.89 +/- 0.018 (+/- SE)), although requires many fewer questions to be answered.

Science-policy in environmental and health risk assessment: if we cannot do without, can we do better?

How can empirical evidence of adverse effects from exposure to noxious agents, which is often incomplete and uncertain, be used most appropriately to protect human health? We examine several important questions on the best uses of empirical evidence in regulatory risk management decision-making raised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s science-policy concerning uncertainty and variability in human health risk assessment. In our view, the US EPA (and other agencies that have adopted similar views of risk management) can often improve decision-making by decreasing reliance on default values and assumptions, particularly when causation is uncertain. This can be achieved by more fully exploiting decision-theoretic methods and criteria that explicitly account for uncertain, possibly conflicting scientific beliefs and that can be fully studied by advocates and adversaries of a policy choice, in administrative decision-making involving risk assessment. The substitution of decision-theoretic frameworks for default assumption-driven policies also allows stakeholder attitudes toward risk to be incorporated into policy debates, so that the public and risk managers can more explicitly identify the roles of risk-aversion or other attitudes toward risk and uncertainty in policy recommendations. Decision theory provides a sound scientific way explicitly to account for new knowledge and its effects on eventual policy choices. Although these improvements can complicate regulatory analyses, simplifying default assumptions can create substantial costs to society and can prematurely cut off consideration of new scientific insights (e.g., possible beneficial health effects from exposure to sufficiently low 'hormetic' doses of some agents). In many cases, the administrative burden of applying decision-analytic methods is likely to be more than offset by improved effectiveness of regulations in achieving desired goals. Because many foreign jurisdictions adopt US EPA reasoning and methods of risk analysis, it may be especially valuable to incorporate decision-theoretic principles that transcend local differences among jurisdictions.

Kick'n'on: The design and evaluation of a group programme for young males with psychotic disorders

Young men with psychotic disorders have persistently poorer outcomes in social functioning when interventions aimed at arresting social isolation are not implemented. Recent literature has indicated that it is important to develop rehabilitation programmes that are based on areas of needs that are identified by the participants. To assist in the design of a group programme, a qualitative (focus group) investigation of the perceptions of young males concerning male roles and identity in today’s society was conducted. The participants were six young males with psychotic disorders who had been referred to an Australian regional rehabilitation service to address poor social functioning and social isolation. Three main themes emerged from the focus groups. These were role models, concept of what is a man, and societal expectations. The findings were used to develop a group programme called Kick’n’On.