University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
J Interpers Violence. 2012 Dec;27(18):3553-78. doi: 10.1177/0886260512447570. Epub 2012 May 29.
To examine the predictive accuracy of four well established risk assessment instruments (PCL-R, HCR-20, SVR-20, and Static-99) in an important subgroup of sexual offenders, these instruments were assessed retrospectively based on information from forensic psychiatric court reports in a sample of 90 released male sexual homicide offenders (out of an original sample of 166) in Germany. Follow-up information about criminal reconvictions after release were obtained from the federal criminal records. Total scores as well as subscales and single items of these risk assessment instruments did not predict sexual recidivism, and only some of them had moderate predictive power regarding nonsexual violent recidivism. Possible explanations for these unexpected results are the retrospective study design with missing information about influences during the long duration of detention and time after release, the small sample size as well as the possibility that the risk assessment instruments investigated were valid for general sex offender samples, but not for the particular subgroup of offenders with sexually motivated homicides.
为了检验四个成熟的风险评估工具(PCL-R、HCR-20、SVR-20 和 Static-99)在性犯罪者一个重要亚组中的预测准确性,这些工具基于德国 90 名已释放男性性杀人罪犯(原始样本 166 名)的法医精神病法庭报告中的信息进行了回顾性评估。从联邦犯罪记录中获得了释放后的犯罪重审信息。这些风险评估工具的总得分以及子量表和单项都不能预测性复发,只有其中一些对非性暴力复发具有中等预测能力。对于这些出乎意料的结果,可能的解释是回顾性研究设计,缺乏关于在长期拘留期间和释放后的影响的信息,样本量小,以及所调查的风险评估工具可能对一般性犯罪者样本有效,但对具有性动机杀人的特定罪犯亚组无效。