Gender-sensitive Violence Risk Assessment

Authors Vivienne de Vogel, Mieke Bruggeman, Marike Lancel
Published in Criminal Justice and Behavior
Publication date 13 January 2019
Research groups Working with Mandated Clients
Type Article


Most violence risk assessment tools have been validated predominantly in males. In this multicenter study, the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 (HCR-20), Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 Version 3 (HCR-20V3), Female Additional Manual (FAM), Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF), and Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) were coded on file information of 78 female forensic psychiatric patients discharged between 1993 and 2012 with a mean follow-up period of 11.8 years from one of four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. Notable was the high rate of mortality (17.9%) and readmission to psychiatric settings (11.5%) after discharge. Official reconviction data could be retrieved from the Ministry of Justice and Security for 71 women. Twenty-four women (33.8%) were reconvicted after discharge, including 13 for violent offenses (18.3%). Overall, predictive validity was moderate for all types of recidivism, but low for violence. The START Vulnerability scores, HCR-20V3, and FAM showed the highest predictive accuracy for all recidivism. With respect to violent recidivism, only the START Vulnerability scores and the Clinical scale of the HCR-20V3 demonstrated significant predictive accuracy.

Downloads en links

On this publication contributed

Language English
Published in Criminal Justice and Behavior
Key words risk assessment, gender, female forensic psychiatric patients, recidivism, mortality
Page range 1-22

Vivienne de Vogel

Vivienne de Vogel | Professor | Working with Mandated Clients

Vivienne de Vogel

  • Professor
  • Research group: Working with Mandated Clients