安全发展障碍服务中的创伤和制度风险:SAVRY是否会增加暴露于ace的青少年的风险?

IF 0.5 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
E. Webb, Deborah J. Morris, Abbey Hamer, J. Davies
{"title":"安全发展障碍服务中的创伤和制度风险:SAVRY是否会增加暴露于ace的青少年的风险?","authors":"E. Webb, Deborah J. Morris, Abbey Hamer, J. Davies","doi":"10.1108/jidob-09-2021-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are highly prevalent in people with developmental disorders who engage in offending behaviour. Many violence-based risk assessment tools include items pertaining to ACEs, and may inflate risk scores in trauma-exposed groups. This paper aims to explore the relationships between ACEs, risk assessment scores, incidents of risk and restrictive practices, in adolescents with developmental disorders in a forensic inpatient setting.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nSecondary analysis was conducted on clinical data for 34 adolescents detained to a developmental disorder service. Data were extracted for Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) risk scores and risk behaviours and restrictive practices, as measures of observed risk.\n\n\nFindings\nParticipants exposed to more ACEs had higher SAVRY risk scores (p < 0.001, two-tailed), with elevations specifically on the historical subscale (p < 0.001, two-tailed). Neither ACEs nor risk scores were associated with the frequency of risk behaviours. Nevertheless, participants exposed to four or more ACEs were secluded more frequently (p = 0.015, two-tailed), indicating a potential association between trauma and risk severity. Those with more complex developmental disorders experienced fewer ACEs (p = 0.02, two-tailed) and engaged in self-harm behaviours less frequently (p = 0.04, two-tailed).\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe inclusion of ACEs in risk assessment tools may lead to the inadvertent stigmatization of trauma-exposed individuals. Further investigation is necessary to offer clarity on the impact of early adversity on risk assessment accuracy and levels of institutional risk, and the role of developmental disorders in this relationship.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the relative associations between ACEs, risk assessment scores and observed institutional risk and does so in a highly marginalized population.\n","PeriodicalId":43468,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities and Offending Behaviour","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trauma and institutional risk in a secure developmental disorder service: does the SAVRY inflate risk in adolescents exposed to ACEs?\",\"authors\":\"E. Webb, Deborah J. Morris, Abbey Hamer, J. Davies\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jidob-09-2021-0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are highly prevalent in people with developmental disorders who engage in offending behaviour. Many violence-based risk assessment tools include items pertaining to ACEs, and may inflate risk scores in trauma-exposed groups. This paper aims to explore the relationships between ACEs, risk assessment scores, incidents of risk and restrictive practices, in adolescents with developmental disorders in a forensic inpatient setting.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nSecondary analysis was conducted on clinical data for 34 adolescents detained to a developmental disorder service. Data were extracted for Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) risk scores and risk behaviours and restrictive practices, as measures of observed risk.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nParticipants exposed to more ACEs had higher SAVRY risk scores (p < 0.001, two-tailed), with elevations specifically on the historical subscale (p < 0.001, two-tailed). Neither ACEs nor risk scores were associated with the frequency of risk behaviours. Nevertheless, participants exposed to four or more ACEs were secluded more frequently (p = 0.015, two-tailed), indicating a potential association between trauma and risk severity. Those with more complex developmental disorders experienced fewer ACEs (p = 0.02, two-tailed) and engaged in self-harm behaviours less frequently (p = 0.04, two-tailed).\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe inclusion of ACEs in risk assessment tools may lead to the inadvertent stigmatization of trauma-exposed individuals. Further investigation is necessary to offer clarity on the impact of early adversity on risk assessment accuracy and levels of institutional risk, and the role of developmental disorders in this relationship.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the relative associations between ACEs, risk assessment scores and observed institutional risk and does so in a highly marginalized population.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":43468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities and Offending Behaviour\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities and Offending Behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jidob-09-2021-0015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities and Offending Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jidob-09-2021-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的不良儿童经历(ACE)在有冒犯行为的发育障碍患者中非常普遍。许多基于暴力的风险评估工具包括与ACE相关的项目,并可能夸大创伤暴露组的风险评分。本文旨在探讨在法医住院环境中患有发育障碍的青少年的ACE、风险评估分数、风险事件和限制性做法之间的关系。设计/方法/方法对34名被拘留在发育障碍服务机构的青少年的临床数据进行了二次分析。提取了青年暴力风险结构化评估(SAVRY)风险评分和风险行为和限制性做法的数据,作为观察到的风险的衡量标准。发现暴露于更多ACE的参与者具有更高的SAVRY风险评分(p<0.001,双尾),特别是在历史分量表上的升高(p<001,双尾的)。ACE和风险评分都与风险行为的频率无关。然而,暴露于四种或四种以上ACE的参与者更频繁地被隔离(p=0.015,双尾),这表明创伤和风险严重程度之间存在潜在关联。那些患有更复杂发育障碍的人经历的ACE更少(p=0.02,双尾),参与自残行为的频率更低(p=0.04,双尾。有必要进行进一步的调查,以明确早期逆境对风险评估准确性和机构风险水平的影响,以及发育障碍在这种关系中的作用。原创性/价值据作者所知,这项研究首次探索了ACE、风险评估分数和观察到的机构风险之间的相对关联,并在高度边缘化的人群中进行了探索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trauma and institutional risk in a secure developmental disorder service: does the SAVRY inflate risk in adolescents exposed to ACEs?
Purpose Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are highly prevalent in people with developmental disorders who engage in offending behaviour. Many violence-based risk assessment tools include items pertaining to ACEs, and may inflate risk scores in trauma-exposed groups. This paper aims to explore the relationships between ACEs, risk assessment scores, incidents of risk and restrictive practices, in adolescents with developmental disorders in a forensic inpatient setting. Design/methodology/approach Secondary analysis was conducted on clinical data for 34 adolescents detained to a developmental disorder service. Data were extracted for Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) risk scores and risk behaviours and restrictive practices, as measures of observed risk. Findings Participants exposed to more ACEs had higher SAVRY risk scores (p < 0.001, two-tailed), with elevations specifically on the historical subscale (p < 0.001, two-tailed). Neither ACEs nor risk scores were associated with the frequency of risk behaviours. Nevertheless, participants exposed to four or more ACEs were secluded more frequently (p = 0.015, two-tailed), indicating a potential association between trauma and risk severity. Those with more complex developmental disorders experienced fewer ACEs (p = 0.02, two-tailed) and engaged in self-harm behaviours less frequently (p = 0.04, two-tailed). Research limitations/implications The inclusion of ACEs in risk assessment tools may lead to the inadvertent stigmatization of trauma-exposed individuals. Further investigation is necessary to offer clarity on the impact of early adversity on risk assessment accuracy and levels of institutional risk, and the role of developmental disorders in this relationship. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the relative associations between ACEs, risk assessment scores and observed institutional risk and does so in a highly marginalized population.
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信