This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
OBJECTIVES: Few studies have examined how much individuals change on intermediate targets of risk to reoffend. Even fewer studies have examined the extent to which change on such measures predict reoffending. Establishing the validity of intermediate measures requires a multistep approach that (a) assesses the reliability of the change, (b) assesses change using statistical analyses that can account for measurement error, and (c) examines the extent to which change on these intermediate measures predict reoffending. METHOD: = 632). RESULTS: We found that risk to reoffend changes across time, the pattern of change varies across individuals, risk levels can predict different patterns of change, and that the best predictors of recidivism are the latest score or a rolling average of scores. CONCLUSIONS: Community supervision can use recent information concerning the community adjustment of their clients to predict recidivism. Best practice includes updating assessments and adjusting supervision practices based on their clients' most recent assessment, or the average of previous assessments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Babchishin et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: