用不完全访谈数据预测校园暴力风险:一种自动评估方法。

IF 3.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JAMIA Open Pub Date : 2025-07-31 eCollection Date: 2025-08-01 DOI:10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf084
Lara J Kanbar, Alexander Osborn, Andrew Cifuentes, Jennifer Combs, Michael Sorter, Drew Barzman, Judith W Dexheimer
{"title":"用不完全访谈数据预测校园暴力风险:一种自动评估方法。","authors":"Lara J Kanbar, Alexander Osborn, Andrew Cifuentes, Jennifer Combs, Michael Sorter, Drew Barzman, Judith W Dexheimer","doi":"10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>School violence risk prevention in the United States relies on manual assessments that are time-consuming and subjective. We developed a machine learning algorithm named Automated RIsk Assessment (ARIA), using natural language processing (NLP) to find linguistic patterns in standardized interview questions that can predict risk of aggression. Our goal was to evaluate the incremental change in performance with the addition of each question to simulate situations where interviews cannot be completed.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Students were interviewed with 2 14-question risk assessments, the Brief Rating of Aggression by Children and Adolescents (BRACHA) and the School Safety Scale (SSS), that encouraged open-ended answers to the interview questions. The reference standard was defined as the subject's likeliness to display aggression in the future as determined by a forensic psychiatrist. Feature sets were extracted to represent the addition of 1 question at a time in a typical interview, up to and including the 28 total main questions along with other sub-questions that arose. The ARIA NLP pipeline tokenized each feature set, then extracted n-gram features (<i>n</i> <b>≤</b> 5) that captured contextual and semantic information. The features were evaluated using an L2-regularized logistic regression classifier and L2-regularized support vector machine (L2-SVM) classifier.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between May 1, 2015 and February 6, 2021, 412 assessment interviews were conducted. When compared to clinical judgement, ARIA performed with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.9 after 10 BRACHA questions, suggesting that it remains powerful even with truncated interviews. The full BRACHA had similar performance to the BRACHA + SSS assessment.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>ARIA could use incomplete risk assessment interviews to provide modest recommendations even if interview completion is not possible. This could help to reduce the burden for the social worker or school counselor who may be using ARIA in less-than-ideal conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36278,"journal":{"name":"JAMIA Open","volume":"8 4","pages":"ooaf084"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12313018/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forecasting school violence risk with incomplete interview data: an automated assessment approach.\",\"authors\":\"Lara J Kanbar, Alexander Osborn, Andrew Cifuentes, Jennifer Combs, Michael Sorter, Drew Barzman, Judith W Dexheimer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>School violence risk prevention in the United States relies on manual assessments that are time-consuming and subjective. We developed a machine learning algorithm named Automated RIsk Assessment (ARIA), using natural language processing (NLP) to find linguistic patterns in standardized interview questions that can predict risk of aggression. Our goal was to evaluate the incremental change in performance with the addition of each question to simulate situations where interviews cannot be completed.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Students were interviewed with 2 14-question risk assessments, the Brief Rating of Aggression by Children and Adolescents (BRACHA) and the School Safety Scale (SSS), that encouraged open-ended answers to the interview questions. The reference standard was defined as the subject's likeliness to display aggression in the future as determined by a forensic psychiatrist. Feature sets were extracted to represent the addition of 1 question at a time in a typical interview, up to and including the 28 total main questions along with other sub-questions that arose. The ARIA NLP pipeline tokenized each feature set, then extracted n-gram features (<i>n</i> <b>≤</b> 5) that captured contextual and semantic information. The features were evaluated using an L2-regularized logistic regression classifier and L2-regularized support vector machine (L2-SVM) classifier.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between May 1, 2015 and February 6, 2021, 412 assessment interviews were conducted. When compared to clinical judgement, ARIA performed with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.9 after 10 BRACHA questions, suggesting that it remains powerful even with truncated interviews. The full BRACHA had similar performance to the BRACHA + SSS assessment.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>ARIA could use incomplete risk assessment interviews to provide modest recommendations even if interview completion is not possible. This could help to reduce the burden for the social worker or school counselor who may be using ARIA in less-than-ideal conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMIA Open\",\"volume\":\"8 4\",\"pages\":\"ooaf084\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12313018/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMIA Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf084\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMIA Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooaf084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:美国的校园暴力风险预防依赖于耗时且主观的人工评估。我们开发了一种名为自动风险评估(ARIA)的机器学习算法,使用自然语言处理(NLP)在标准化面试问题中找到可以预测攻击风险的语言模式。我们的目标是通过增加每个问题来模拟面试无法完成的情况来评估绩效的增量变化。材料与方法:采用2份14题风险评估问卷对学生进行访谈,问卷采用BRACHA(儿童青少年攻击行为简易评定量表)和SSS(学校安全量表),鼓励开放式回答访谈问题。参照标准定义为被试在未来表现出攻击性的可能性,由法医精神病学家确定。特征集被提取出来,代表在一次典型的采访中每次增加一个问题,最多包括28个主要问题以及其他出现的子问题。ARIA NLP管道对每个特征集进行标记,然后提取捕获上下文和语义信息的n个图特征(n≤5)。使用l2正则化逻辑回归分类器和l2正则化支持向量机(L2-SVM)分类器对特征进行评估。结果:2015年5月1日至2021年2月6日,共进行了412次评估访谈。与临床判断相比,在回答10个BRACHA问题后,ARIA在接受者工作特征曲线下的面积为0.9,这表明即使在截短的访谈中,ARIA仍然很强大。完整的BRACHA与BRACHA + SSS评估的表现相似。讨论和结论:即使不可能完成访谈,ARIA也可以使用不完整的风险评估访谈来提供适度的建议。这可能有助于减轻社会工作者或学校辅导员的负担,他们可能在不太理想的条件下使用ARIA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Forecasting school violence risk with incomplete interview data: an automated assessment approach.

Forecasting school violence risk with incomplete interview data: an automated assessment approach.

Forecasting school violence risk with incomplete interview data: an automated assessment approach.

Forecasting school violence risk with incomplete interview data: an automated assessment approach.

Objectives: School violence risk prevention in the United States relies on manual assessments that are time-consuming and subjective. We developed a machine learning algorithm named Automated RIsk Assessment (ARIA), using natural language processing (NLP) to find linguistic patterns in standardized interview questions that can predict risk of aggression. Our goal was to evaluate the incremental change in performance with the addition of each question to simulate situations where interviews cannot be completed.

Materials and methods: Students were interviewed with 2 14-question risk assessments, the Brief Rating of Aggression by Children and Adolescents (BRACHA) and the School Safety Scale (SSS), that encouraged open-ended answers to the interview questions. The reference standard was defined as the subject's likeliness to display aggression in the future as determined by a forensic psychiatrist. Feature sets were extracted to represent the addition of 1 question at a time in a typical interview, up to and including the 28 total main questions along with other sub-questions that arose. The ARIA NLP pipeline tokenized each feature set, then extracted n-gram features (n 5) that captured contextual and semantic information. The features were evaluated using an L2-regularized logistic regression classifier and L2-regularized support vector machine (L2-SVM) classifier.

Results: Between May 1, 2015 and February 6, 2021, 412 assessment interviews were conducted. When compared to clinical judgement, ARIA performed with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.9 after 10 BRACHA questions, suggesting that it remains powerful even with truncated interviews. The full BRACHA had similar performance to the BRACHA + SSS assessment.

Discussion and conclusion: ARIA could use incomplete risk assessment interviews to provide modest recommendations even if interview completion is not possible. This could help to reduce the burden for the social worker or school counselor who may be using ARIA in less-than-ideal conditions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMIA Open
JAMIA Open Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
102
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信