Treatment evaluation in forensic psychiatry. Which one should be used: The clinical judgment or the Instrument-based assessment of change?

Erwin Schuringa*, Marinus Spreen, Stefan Bogaerts

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

In forensic psychiatry, it is common practice to use an unstructured clinical judgment for treatment evaluation. From risk assessment studies, it is known that the unstructured clinical judgment is unreliable and the use of instruments is recommended. This paper aims to explore the clinical judgment of change compared to the calculated change using the Instrument for Forensic Treatment Evaluation (IFTE) in relation to changes in inpatient violence This study shows that the clinical judgment is much more positive about patient’s behavioral changes than the calculated change. And that the calculated change is more in accordance with the change in the occurrence of inpatient violence, suggesting that the calculated change reflects reality closer than the unstructured clinical judgment. Therefore, it is advisable to use the IFTE as a base to make a structured professional judgment of the treatment evaluation of a forensic psychiatric patient.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages16
JournalInternational Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2022

Keywords

  • IFTE
  • METAANALYSIS
  • NEED
  • PROJECT
  • VIOLENCE RISK
  • calculated change
  • clinical judgment
  • forensic treatment evaluation
  • inpatient violence

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Treatment evaluation in forensic psychiatry. Which one should be used: The clinical judgment or the Instrument-based assessment of change?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this