The HCR-20V3 is a violence risk assessment tool that is widely used in forensic clinical practice for risk management planning. The predictive value of the tool, when used in court for legal decisionmaking, is not yet intensively been studied and questions about legal admissibility may arise. This article aims to provide legal and mental health practitioners with an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the HCR-20V3 when applied in legal settings. The HCR-20V3 is described and discussed with respect to its psychometric properties for different groups and settings. Issues involving legal admissibility and potential biases when conducting violence risk assessments with the HCR-20V3 are outlined. To explore legal admissibility challenges with respect to the HCR-20V3, we searched case law databases since 2013 from Australia, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA. In total, we found 546 cases referring to the HCR-20/HCR-20V3. In these cases, the tool was rarely challenged (4.03%), and when challenged, it never resulted in a court decision that the risk assessment was inadmissible. Finally, we provide recommendations for legal practitioners for the cross-examination of risk assessments and recommendations for mental health professionals who conduct risk assessments and report to the court. We conclude with suggestions for future research with the HCR-20V3 to strengthen the evidence base for use of the instrument in legal contexts.
Objectives To report (1) the injury incidence in recreational runners in preparation for a 8-km or 16-km running event and (2) which factors were associated withan increased injury risk. Methods Prospective cohort study in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Participants (n=5327) received a baseline survey to determine event distance (8 km or 16 km), main sport, running experience, previous injuries, recent overuse injuries and personal characteristics. Three days after the race, they received a follow-up survey to determine duration of training period, running distance per week, training hours, injuries during preparation and use oftechnology. Univariate and multivariate regression models were applied to examine potential risk factors for injuries. Results 1304 (24.5%) participants completed both surveys. After excluding participants with current health problems, no signed informed consent, missing or incorrect data, we included 706 (13.3%) participants. In total, 142 participants (20.1%) reported an injury during preparation for the event. Univariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4) and multivariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5) showed that injury history was a significant risk factor for running injuries (Nagelkerke R-square=0.06). Conclusion An injury incidence for recreational runners in preparation for a running event was 20%. A previous injury was the only significant risk factor for runningrelated injuries.
Previous studies have found evidence for a relationship between debt and crime, and for problems in childhood, education, work, and mental and physical health as underlying risk factors. However, insight into the interplay between these possible risk factors is limited. Therefore, a mixed methods approach was applied by both creating a quantitative Gaussian Graphical Model (GGM) and conducting qualitative analyses on 250 client files including risk assessment data from the Dutch probation service, to gain more specific insight into the interaction between potential risk factors. The results show that debt is strongly related to criminal behavior and problems in many life domains for most probation clients. Debt seems to be a direct risk factor for crime, but debt and crime also appear to be highly interrelated as part of a complex interplay of risk factors. The most frequently rated factors – limited or incomplete education, no job and related lack of income, and mental and physical health problems – are highly interwoven and increase the risk of both debt and crime. The findings stress the importance of paying attention to and using interventions focusing on strongly related crime risk factors, including debt, and their complex interplay, to supervise probation clients effectively.
