The predictive validity of the HCR-20 following clinical implementation: does it work in practice?

Gabriele Vojt*, Lindsay D. G. Thomson, Lisa A. Marshall

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract / Description of output

This prospective study describes the predictive validity of the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Scale (HCR-20) when applied to clinical practice among 109 male mentally disordered offenders in a high secure forensic hospital. Data on violent incidents including reconvictions were collected from multiple sources. The results imply that the implemented HCR-20s did not predict future violence regardless of setting (community vs inpatient) nor time (short vs long term) except for serious incidents. This may indicate that the implemented HCR-20s informed risk management through systematic tailoring of care and treatment plans. Evidence supporting this interpretation was found in a reduction in violent incidents and offending when compared to an earlier study with a similar cohort. Alternatively, the completion of a violence risk assessment by clinicians rather than researchers may have affected the quality of completed assessments. Further research is required to better understand the complex mechanisms underlying the translation of identified risk factors into risk management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)371-385
Number of pages15
JournalThe Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2013

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • HCR-20
  • violence risk assessment
  • forensic psychiatry
  • predictive validity
  • CARE


Dive into the research topics of 'The predictive validity of the HCR-20 following clinical implementation: does it work in practice?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this