Predictive Validity of the HKT-R Risk Assessment Tool: Two and 5-Year Violent Recidivism in a Nationwide Sample of Dutch Forensic Psychiatric Patients. (June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bogaerts, Stefan; Spreen, Marinus; ter Horst, Paul; Gerlsma, Coby
• Is Part Of: International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology. Volume 62:Number 8(2018)
• Page Start: 2259
• Page End: 2270
• Publication Date: 2018-06
• Subjects: HKT-R -- predictive validity -- violent recidivism -- clinical decision making; Criminals -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Criminal psychology -- Periodicals; Violent offenders -- Periodicals; Sex offenders -- Periodicals; Criminology -- Periodicals; 364.3
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X17717128
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0306-624X

Abstract

This study has examined the predictive validity of the Historical Clinical Future [ Historisch Klinisch Toekomst ] Revised risk assessment scheme in a cohort of 347 forensic psychiatric patients, which were discharged between 2004 and 2008 from any of 12 highly secure forensic centers in the Netherlands. Predictive validity was measured 2 and 5 years after release. Official reconviction data obtained from the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice were used as outcome measures. Violent reoffending within 2 and 5 years after discharge was assessed. With regard to violent reoffending, results indicated that the predictive validity of the Historical domain was modest for 2 (area under the curve [AUC] = .75) and 5 (AUC = .74) years. The predictive validity of the Clinical domain was marginal for 2 (admission: AUC = .62; discharge: AUC = .63) and 5 (admission: AUC = .69; discharge: AUC = .62) years after release. The predictive validity of the Future domain was modest (AUC = .71) for 2 years and low for 5 (AUC = .58) years. The total score of the instrument was modest for 2 years (AUC = .78) and marginal for 5 (AUC = .68) years. Finally, the Final Risk Judgment was modest for 2 years (AUC = .78) and marginal for 5 (AUC = .63) years time at risk. It is concluded that this risk assessment instrument appears to be a satisfactory instrument for risk assessment.