Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Kutner (1975)
Applied Linear Statistical Models
CD Webster, KS Douglas, D Eaves, SD Hart (1997)
HCR-20: Assessing risk for violence (Version 2)
A. Akobeng (2007)
Understanding diagnostic tests 2: likelihood ratios, pre‐ and post‐test probabilities and their use in clinical practiceActa Pædiatrica, 96
M Borenstein, LV Hedges, JPT Higgins, HR Rothstein (2009)
Introduction to meta-analysis
A. Hald (2005)
History of Probability and Statistics and Their Applications before 1750: Hald/History of Probability & Statistics
GT Harris, ME Rice (2007)
Characterizing the value of actuarial risk assessmentsCriminal Justice and Behavior, 34
S. Hart, C. Michie, D. Cooke (2007)
Precision of actuarial risk assessment instruments: evaluating the 'margins of error' of group v. individual predictions of violence.The British journal of psychiatry. Supplement, 49
A. Agresti, B. Caffo (2000)
Simple and Effective Confidence Intervals for Proportions and Differences of Proportions Result from Adding Two Successes and Two FailuresThe American Statistician, 54
D. Cooke, C. Michie (2009)
Limitations of Diagnostic Precision and Predictive Utility in the Individual Case: A Challenge for Forensic PracticeLaw and Human Behavior, 34
D. Mossman, T. Sellke (2007)
Avoiding errors about ‘margins of error’British Journal of Psychiatry, 191
D. Alwin (2007)
Margins of Error
D. Hosmer, S. Lemeshow (1991)
Applied Logistic Regression
R. Hanson, Monique, Bussiere (1998)
Predicting relapse: a meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 66 2
S. Brodsky (1980)
Criminal Justice and BehaviorCriminal Justice and Behavior, 7
A. Agresti, B. Coull (1998)
Approximate is Better than “Exact” for Interval Estimation of Binomial ProportionsThe American Statistician, 52
E. Wilson (1927)
Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical InferenceJournal of the American Statistical Association, 22
A. Akobeng (2007)
Understanding diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic curvesActa Pædiatrica, 96
R. Hanson, Kelly Morton-Bourgon, Kelly Morton-Bourgon, Emer-Gency Preparedness, Canada Kelly, Morton-Bourgon, S. Brown, H. Gretton, G. Harris, N. Långström, C. Langton, R. Lieb, J. Marques, M. Miner, L. Motiuk, T. Nicholaichuk, J. Proulx, J. Reddon, M. Rice, G. Schiller, L. Studer, L. Song, D. We, Dale Arnold, J. Bonta, Guy Bourgon, D. Grubin, Amy Phenix, V. Quinsey, M. Rice, David Thornton (2005)
The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: a meta-analysis of recidivism studies.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 73 6
D. Hand (1990)
A History of Probability and Statistics and Their Applications before 1750
DP Boer, SD Hart, PR Kropp, CD Webster (1997)
Manual for the Sexual Violence Risk-20: Professional guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence
A. Akobeng (2007)
Understanding diagnostic tests 1: sensitivity, specificity and predictive valuesActa Pædiatrica, 96
J. Bonta, Moira Law, Karl Hanson (1998)
The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: a meta-analysis.Psychological bulletin, 123 2
G. Harris, M. Rice (2007)
Characterizing the Value of Actuarial Violence Risk AssessmentsCriminal Justice and Behavior, 34
R. Hanson, L. Helmus, D. Thornton (2010)
Predicting Recidivism Amongst Sexual Offenders: A Multi-site Study of Static-2002Law and Human Behavior, 34
Some recent articles have proposed that the confidence interval for the predicted outcome of a single case can be used to describe the predictive accuracy of risk assessments (Hart et al. Br J Psychiat 190:60–65, 2007b; Cooke and Michie, Law Hum Behav 2009). Given that the confidence intervals for an individual prediction are very large, Cooke and colleagues have questioned the wisdom of applying recidivism rates estimated from group data to single cases. In this article, we argue that the confidence intervals for the recidivism outcome predicted for a single case will range between zero to one (i.e., be uninformative) when the outcome is dichotomous and the predicted probability is between .05 and .95. This is true by definition and limits the utility of using individual confidence intervals to measure predictive accuracy. Consequently, other quality indicators (many of which are non-quantitative) are needed to determine the accuracy and error of risk evaluations.
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Aug 17, 2010
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.