Forskningsstöd

Sedan SAVRYs tillkomst 2002 har ett 30-tal studier publicerats. Studierna visar att SAVRY har en god prediktiv förmåga avseende våldsbrott och annan kriminalitet (e.g., Catchpole & Gretton, 2003; Lodewijks et al., 2008; Welsh et al., 2008). SAVRY står sig väl till mycket väl vid jämförelse med andra beslutsstöd/instrument (Olver et al., 2009; Singh et al., 2011).

Interbedömaröverenstämmelsen, där två eller fler personer som genomgått utbildning och samträning oberoende av varandra bedömer samma ärende på likartat sätt, bedöms vara hög (e.g., Dolan & Rennie, 2008; Meyers & Schmidt, 2008; Viljoen et al., 2008, Lardén et al., manuskript).

De studier som genomförts med SAVRY har visat likartade resultat beträffande prediktiv förmåga i olika länder och i varierande grupper av unga (Chapman et al., 2006; Gammelgård, 2008; Lodewijks et al., 2008; Welsh et al., 2008) samt i jämförelser mellan pojkar och flickor (Gammelgård, 2008; Meyers & Schmidt, 2008; Penney et al., 2010)

De studier som bedrivits skedde ursprungligen i forskningsmiljöer där forskningsassistenter genomförde skattningarna (e.g., Gammelgård, 2008; Lodewijks et al., 2008 ). Nyare studier avseende kliniker/praktikers prediktiva bedömningar med stöd av SAVRY visar dock också goda resultat (Childs et al., 2013; Hilterman et al., 2013; Vincent et al., 2012). En studie fann också att SAVRY positivt inverkade på kvaliteten på behandlingsplanering för unga lagöverträdare (Vincent et al., 2012).

I Sverige pågår en studie av SAVRY. Den är inriktad på utredningsmetoder inom socialtjänsten, där SAVRY är en av tre metoder som studeras. Resultat från en av studierna står att läsa om i Research on Social Work Practice, DOI:10.1177/1049731515605184. Socialsekreterarna bedömer återfall i allvarlig våldsbrott på en hög nivå  (area under the curve [AUC] = .80, p < .01) , och mindre allvarliga våldsbrott prediceras på en måttlig nivå (AUC = .70, p < .05). Resultaten visade även att utredningarna som genomfördes med stöd av SAVRY innehöll fler risk- och skyddsfaktorer än när utredningarna inte var baserad på någon metod eller när utredningarna var baserade på ADAD. Dessa faktorer predicerade även, med några undantag, återfall i högre utsträckning.


Internationella peer-reviewgranskade artiklar om SAVRY (endast artiklar som är skrivna på engelska är redovisade)

Borum, R., Bartel, P., & Forth, A. (2005). Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) In T. Grisso, G. Vincent, & D. Seagrave (Eds.), Mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice (pp. 311-323). New York: Guilford.

Catchpole, R., & Gretton, H. (2003). The predictive validity of risk assessment with violent young offenders: A 1-year examination of criminal outcome. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 688-708. Abstract

Chapman, J.F., Desai, R.A., Falzer, P.R., & Borum, R. (2006). Violence risk and race in a sample of youth in juvenile detention: The potential to reduce disproportionate minority confinement. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4, 170-184. Abstract

Chu, CM., Daffern, M., & Tomas, S., & Jia Ying, L. (2012). Violence risk and gang affiliation in youth offenders: a recidivism study. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18, 299-315. Abstract

Childs, K.K., Ryals, J., Frick, P., Lawing, K., Phillippi, S.W., & Deprato, D.K. (2013). Examining the validity of the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY) for predicting probation outcomes among adjudicated juvenile offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 31, 256-270. Abstract

Dolan, M. C., & Rennie, C. E. (2008). The Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth as a predictor of recidivism in a United Kingdom cohort of adolescent offenders with conduct disorder.Psychological Assessment, 20, 35-46. Abstract

Duits, N., Doreleijers T.A.H., & van den Brink, W. (2008). Assessment of violence risk in youth for juvenile court: Relevant factors for clinical judgment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 31, 236-240. Abstract

Elkovitch, M.A., Viljoen, J.L., Scalora, M.J., & Ullman, D. (2008). Assessing risk of reoffending in adolescents who have committed a sexual offense: The accuracy of clinical judgments after completion of risk assessment instruments. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 511-528. Abstract

Gammelgård, M., Weizmann-Henelius, G., Koivisto, A-M., Eronen, M., & Kaltiala-Heino, R. (2012). Gender differences in violence risk profiles. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry 23, 76-94. Abstract

Gammelgård, M., Koivisto, A-M., Eronen, M., & Kaltiala-Heino, R (2008). The predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) among institutionalised adolescents. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 19, 352-370. Abstract

Hilterman, E.L.B, Nicholls, T.L., & van Nieuwenhuizen, C. (2013). Predictive validity of risk assessments in juvenile offenders: Comparing the SAVRY, PCL:YV and YLS/CMI with unstructured clinical assessments. publicerad online. Abstract

Klein, V., Yoon, D., Briken, P., Turner, D., Spehr, A., & Rettenberger, M. (2012). Assessment of accused juvenile sex offenders in Germany. A comparison of five different measures. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 30, 181-195. Abstract

Lodewijks, H.P.B., De Ruiter, C., & Doreleijers, T.A.H. (2010). The impact of protective factors in desistance from violent reoffending: A study in three samples of adolescent offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 568-587. Abstract

Lodewijks, H.P.B., Doreleijers, T.A.H., De Ruiter, C., & Borum, R. (2008). Predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) during residential treatment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 31, 263-271. Abstract

Lodewijks, H.P.B., Doreleijers, T.A.H., & De Ruiter, C. (2008). SAVRY risk assessment in violent Dutch adolescents: Relation to sentencing and recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 696-709. Abstract

Lodewijks, H.P.B., De Ruiter, C., & Doreleijers, T.A.H. (2008). Gender differences in violent outcome and risk assessment in adolescent offenders after residential treatment. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 133-146. Abstract

McGowan, M.R., Horn, R.A., & Mellott, R.N. (2011). The predictive validity of the stuctured assessment of violence risk in youth in secondary educational settings. Psychological Assessment, 23, 478-486. Abstract

Meyers, J. & Schmidt, F. (2008). Predictive validity of the Structured Assessment for Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) with juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 344-355. Abstract

Olver, M.E., Stockdale K.C., & Wormith, J.S. (2009). Risk assessment with young offenders: A Meta-Analysis of three assessment measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 329-353. Abstract

Penney, S.R., Lee, Z., & Moretti, M.M. (2010). Gender differences in risk factors for violence: An examination of the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth. Aggressive Behavior, 35, 1-15. Abstract

Rennie, C.E., & Dolan, M.C. (2010). The significance of protective factors in the assessment of risk. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 20, 8-22. Abstract

Schmidt, F., Campbell, M A., & Houlding, C. (2011). Comparative analyses of the YLS/CMI, SAVRY, and PCL:YV in adolescent offenders: A 10-year follow-up into adulthood. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 9, 23-42. Abstract

Singh, J.P., Grann, M., & Fazel, S. (2011). A comparative study of violence risk assessment tools: A systematic review and metaregression analysis of 68 studies involving 25,980 participants. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 499-513. Abstract

Spice, Viljoen, J.L., Gretton, H.M., & Roesch, R. (2010). Psychological assessment for adult sentencing of juvenile offenders: An evaluation of the RSTI and the SAVRY. International Journal of Forensic Mental Helath, 9, 124-137. Abstract

Welsh J., Schmidt F, McKinnon L, Chattha H. & Meyers J. (2008). A comparative study of adolescent risk assessment instruments: Predictive and incremental validity. Assessment, 15, 104-115. Abstract

Vincent, G.M., Guy, L.S., Gershenson, B.G & McCabe, P. (2012). Does risk assessment make a difference? Results of implementing the SAVRY in juvenile probation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 30, 384-405. Abstract

Vincent, G.M., Guy, L.S., Fusco, S.L., & Gershenson, B.G. (2012). Field reliability of the SAVRY with juvenile probation officers: Implications for training. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 225-236. Abstract

Vincent, G.M., Chapman, J. & Cook, N.E. (2011). Risk-needs assessment in juvenile justice: Predictive validity of the SAVRY, racial differences, and the contribution of needs factors. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 42-62. Abstract

Witt, P. (2002). Review of the manual for the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY ). Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 30, 599-603.


Opublicerade avhandlingar
Fitch, D. (2004). Analysis of common risk factors for violent behavior in native American adolescents referred for residential treatment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas-Clear Lake.

McEachran, A. (2001). The predictive validity of the PCL:YV and the SAVRY in a population of adolescent offenders. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Burnaby, British Columbia: Simon Fraser University.

McGowan, M. R. (2007). The predictive validity of violence risk assessment within educational settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Northern Arizona University.

Roth, E. V. (2006). Assessment of violence risk and psychopathy in a population of incarcerated, adolescent, hispanic males. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.