{"title":"犯罪者项目结果研究质量的系统评价:走向一种新的结果测量模型。","authors":"Berta Vall, Xavier López-I-Martín, Jaume Grané Morcillo, Marianne Hester","doi":"10.1177/15248380231203718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review assessed whether studies on the outcomes of perpetrator programs comply with the model recommendations for outcome evaluation. Three databases (PsycINFO, Medline, and Scopus) were used to identify perpetrator program outcome studies from 1988 to 2021. The inclusion criteria were as follows: empirical studies with no time restriction; published in English or Spanish; evaluated interventions aimed at male perpetrators of any type of abuse toward women; evaluated the effectiveness of the intervention in a follow-up post-intervention; and provided an indicator of recidivism. The search and selection process resulted in 46 original studies. The results showed that studies did not include a thorough description of the study sample. Many approaches to psychological intervention are used, with cognitive behavioral therapy being the most widely used. Most studies did not describe the program content. Dropout rates varied greatly from one study to another (from 0% to 64%) and only eight studies provided dropout rates specified by each type of perpetrator. The follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 9 years. The recidivism rates (ranging from 5% to 72.5%), and their assessments were also very different. Only 12 of the 46 studies (26.1%) used more than one source to obtain recidivism rates. In terms of outcomes, few studies considered (ex-) partner accounts. Some studies had other measures of outcome, whereas a few included a pretest-posttest. In summary, these studies do not follow the recommendations of the model.</p>","PeriodicalId":54211,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","volume":" ","pages":"1985-1997"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review of the Quality of Perpetrator Programs' Outcome Studies: Toward A New Model of Outcome Measurement.\",\"authors\":\"Berta Vall, Xavier López-I-Martín, Jaume Grané Morcillo, Marianne Hester\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15248380231203718\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This systematic review assessed whether studies on the outcomes of perpetrator programs comply with the model recommendations for outcome evaluation. Three databases (PsycINFO, Medline, and Scopus) were used to identify perpetrator program outcome studies from 1988 to 2021. The inclusion criteria were as follows: empirical studies with no time restriction; published in English or Spanish; evaluated interventions aimed at male perpetrators of any type of abuse toward women; evaluated the effectiveness of the intervention in a follow-up post-intervention; and provided an indicator of recidivism. The search and selection process resulted in 46 original studies. The results showed that studies did not include a thorough description of the study sample. Many approaches to psychological intervention are used, with cognitive behavioral therapy being the most widely used. Most studies did not describe the program content. Dropout rates varied greatly from one study to another (from 0% to 64%) and only eight studies provided dropout rates specified by each type of perpetrator. The follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 9 years. The recidivism rates (ranging from 5% to 72.5%), and their assessments were also very different. Only 12 of the 46 studies (26.1%) used more than one source to obtain recidivism rates. In terms of outcomes, few studies considered (ex-) partner accounts. Some studies had other measures of outcome, whereas a few included a pretest-posttest. In summary, these studies do not follow the recommendations of the model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trauma Violence & Abuse\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1985-1997\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trauma Violence & Abuse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231203718\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Violence & Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231203718","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Systematic Review of the Quality of Perpetrator Programs' Outcome Studies: Toward A New Model of Outcome Measurement.
This systematic review assessed whether studies on the outcomes of perpetrator programs comply with the model recommendations for outcome evaluation. Three databases (PsycINFO, Medline, and Scopus) were used to identify perpetrator program outcome studies from 1988 to 2021. The inclusion criteria were as follows: empirical studies with no time restriction; published in English or Spanish; evaluated interventions aimed at male perpetrators of any type of abuse toward women; evaluated the effectiveness of the intervention in a follow-up post-intervention; and provided an indicator of recidivism. The search and selection process resulted in 46 original studies. The results showed that studies did not include a thorough description of the study sample. Many approaches to psychological intervention are used, with cognitive behavioral therapy being the most widely used. Most studies did not describe the program content. Dropout rates varied greatly from one study to another (from 0% to 64%) and only eight studies provided dropout rates specified by each type of perpetrator. The follow-up period ranged from 3 months to 9 years. The recidivism rates (ranging from 5% to 72.5%), and their assessments were also very different. Only 12 of the 46 studies (26.1%) used more than one source to obtain recidivism rates. In terms of outcomes, few studies considered (ex-) partner accounts. Some studies had other measures of outcome, whereas a few included a pretest-posttest. In summary, these studies do not follow the recommendations of the model.
期刊介绍:
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is devoted to organizing, synthesizing, and expanding knowledge on all force of trauma, abuse, and violence. This peer-reviewed journal is practitioner oriented and will publish only reviews of research, conceptual or theoretical articles, and law review articles. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse is dedicated to professionals and advanced students in clinical training who work with any form of trauma, abuse, and violence. It is intended to compile knowledge that clearly affects practice, policy, and research.