<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Gina M. Vincent</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2013  All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent</link>
<description>Recent documents in Gina M. Vincent</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:51:09 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>








<item>
<title>Impact of risk/needs assessment on juvenile probation officers&apos; decision making: Importance of implementation</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/38</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/38</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:55:34 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>The adoption of risk assessment tools has increased in popularity in the juvenile justice system due, in part, to recommendations by the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA). However, very little is known about whether adoption of these tools actually effectuates change in the way young offenders are handled. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered from 111 juvenile probation officers (JPOs) from six probation offices before and twice after standardized, rigorous implementation of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk for Youth (SAVRY) or the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). The purpose of this study was to examine JPOs' changes in attitudes and case management decisions following implementation of a risk/needs assessment (RNA) tool. There was a significant reduction in JPOs' perceptions of the proportion of young offenders who would reoffend. There were many shifts in JPOs' decision-making to be more consistent with Risk-Need-Responsivity practices, such as (a) making service referrals based on the fit between youths' criminogenic needs and services, and (b) assigning levels of supervision based on youths' level of risk. There was a shift in attention to more evidence-based dynamic risk factors. These changes occurred regardless of which RNA tool was used. Juvenile justice agencies are encouraged to adopt an evidence-based RNA tool using a sound implementation model in order to meet the objectives of the JJDPA and RNR practices. Benefits and barriers to adoption of RNA tools by juvenile probation departments are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Adolescent Psychiatry</category>

<category>Adolescent</category>

<category>Child</category>

<category>Forensic Psychiatry</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

<category>Violence</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice: A Guidebook for Implementation</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/36</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/36</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:10:43 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Juvenile court decision-makers often must decide whether youth need certain interventions to reduce the risk of harm to others. Is the risk sufficiently great that some sort of protective intervention is necessary? Risk assessment can assist with these decisions. The primary purpose of this Guide is to provide a structure for jurisdictions, juvenile probation or centralized statewide agencies striving to implement risk assessment or to improve their current risk assessment practices.</p>
<p>Empirical support for aspects of the manual can be found in the following publications: <ul> <li>Vincent, G. M., Guy, L. E., Fusco, S.L., & Gershenson, B.G. (2012). <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10979-011-9284-2">Field reliability of the SAVRY with probation officers: Implications for training.</a> Law Hum Behav. 2012 Jun;36(3):225-36. doi: 10.1007/s10979-011-9284-2.</li> <li>Vincent, G. M., Guy, L. E., Gershenson, B.G., & McCabe, P. (2012). <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2014">Does risk assessment make a difference? Results of implementing the SAVRY in juvenile probation.</a> Behav Sci Law. 2012 Jul;30(4):384-405. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2014.</li> <li>Vincent, G. M., Paiva-Salisbury, M. L.,Cook, N. E., Guy, L. S., Perrault, R. T. (2012). <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027186">Impact of risk/needs assessment on juvenile probation officers’ decision making: Importance of implementation.</a> Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 2012 Nov; 18(4):549-576. doi: 10.1037/a0027186.</li> </ul></p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Adolescent Psychiatry</category>

<category>Forensic Psychiatry</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

<category>Violence</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Does Risk Assessment Make a Difference? Results of Implementing the SAVRY in Juvenile Probation</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/35</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/35</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:25:40 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>An effective approach to reducing recidivism is, first, to identify a youth's risk of reoffending and then to match the intensity of interventions to that risk level. This pre-post quasi-experimental, prospective study compared 247 (pre) with 217 (post) adjudicated youths to examine the implementation of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and its effects on case management practices in Louisiana's Caddo parish probation office. The results indicated that placement rates dropped by 50%, use of maximum levels of supervision dropped by almost 30%, and use of community services decreased except for high-risk youths, but only after the SAVRY was properly implemented. This shift towards more appropriate allocation of resources that are matched to risk level occurred without a significant increase in reoffending. The implications for implementation and for use of risk/needs assessment in juvenile probation are discussed. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Probation officers&apos; perceptions of youths&apos; risk of reoffending and use of risk assessment in case management</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/34</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/34</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:25:38 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Juvenile probation officers (JPOs) are required to make numerous decisions about the case management of young offenders on a daily basis. This multi-site study examined JPOs' (N = 64) perceptions of the typical youth's risk of reoffending before implementation of a risk/needs assessment (RNA) tool, and their self-reported, case management decision-making after implementation of an RNA tool. Results indicated that JPOs tended to overestimate the likely base rates of reoffending while RNA tool estimates were more accurate. Further, most JPOs appeared to be making service referral and placement decisions commensurate with youths' risk levels, regardless of whether they claimed to use the RNA tool in their decisions. Variability in application of risk to case management practices was more a function of the probation office than of the specific JPO. Implications for use of risk assessment in juvenile probation are discussed. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Rachael T. Perrault et al.</author>


<category>Criminals</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

<category>Law Enforcement</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Assessing violence risk and psychopathy in juvenile and adult offenders: a survey of clinical practices</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/33</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/33</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:00:44 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>This study surveyed 199 forensic clinicians about the practices that they use in assessing violence risk in juvenile and adult offenders. Results indicated that the use of risk assessment and psychopathy tools was common. Although clinicians reported more routine use of psychopathy measures in adult risk assessments compared with juvenile risks assessments, 79% of clinicians reported using psychopathy measures at least once in a while in juvenile risk assessments. Extremely few clinicians, however, believe that juveniles should be labeled or referred to as psychopaths. Juvenile risk reports were more likely than adult reports to routinely discuss treatment and protective factors, and provide recommendations to reevaluate risk. The implications of these findings are discussed.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Jodi L. Viljoen et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category> *Risk Assessment</category>

<category>Forensic Psychiatry</category>

<category>Criminals</category>

<category>Psychometrics</category>

<category>Psychological Tests</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Psychiatric symptoms among juveniles incarcerated in adult prison</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/32</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/32</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:00:43 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>OBJECTIVE: Although studies reveal substantial mental health treatment needs among youths in the juvenile justice system, far less is known about young offenders transferred to adult criminal court. This statewide study examined the mental health needs of young offenders who committed serious crimes and were transferred to adult court and subsequently incarcerated in a prison for adults.</p>
<p>METHODS: Sixty-four boys aged 16 and 17 years who were incarcerated in the Texas adult correctional system completed the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2), a mental health screening measure widely used in the juvenile justice system. Scores from the youths in adult prison were compared with those of a matched sample of youths in juvenile correctional facilities, drawn from the MAYSI-2 normative data.</p>
<p>RESULTS: Youths in adult prison reported substantial symptoms of mental health problems. Most youths surveyed (51%) scored above the highest clinical cutoff (the "warning" range) on at least one MAYSI-2 subscale. For every clinical subscale except suicide ideation, the majority of youths (54% to 70%, depending on the subscale) scored above the "caution" range. Juveniles in adult prison reported higher rates of symptoms than did those in juvenile correctional facilities (effect sizes ranged from d=.18 to d=.65, depending on the subscale).</p>
<p>CONCLUSIONS: Although the mental health needs of youths in the juvenile justice system are well documented, this study reveals that mental health treatment needs appear to be even more pronounced in the small subgroup of youths transferred to the adult criminal justice system and incarcerated in adult prison.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Daniel C. Murrie et al.</author>


<category>Prisoners</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>The Use of Psychopathy in Violence Risk Assessments of Adolescent Females</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/31</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/31</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:00:42 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Forensic mental health clinicians frequently are called on to conduct assessments of youths' risk for future violence and offending. The fastest rising demographic group requiring these risk assessments is adolescent girls. This case report illustrates how the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) can be used in risk assessment, as in the case of a 15-year-old girl. As is illustrated, the benefit of using the PCL:YV in a young offender case should be weighed against the potential detrimental effects on the life of the youth. This case report provides specific recommendations about how to apply the PCL:YV with extreme caution when conducting such risk assessments.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Field Reliability of the SAVRY with Juvenile Probation Officers: Implications for Training</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/30</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/30</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:28:01 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Two complimentary studies were conducted to investigate the inter-rater reliability and performance of juvenile justice personnel when conducting the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk for Youth (SAVRY). Study 1 reports the performance on four standardized vignettes of 408 juvenile probation officers (JPOs) and social workers rating the SAVRY as part of their training. JPOs had high agreement with the expert consensus on the SAVRY rating of overall risk and total scores, but those trained by a peer master trainer outperformed those trained by an expert. Study 2 examined the field reliability of the SAVRY on 80 young offender cases rated by a JPO and a trained research assistant. In the field, intra-class correlation coefficients were 'excellent' for SAVRY total and most domain scores, and were 'good' for overall risk ratings. Results suggest that the SAVRY and structured professional judgment can be used reliably in the field by juvenile justice personnel and is comparable to reliability indices reported in more lab-like research studies; however, replication is essential.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Commentary on Seagrave and Grisso: impressions of the state of the art</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/29</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/29</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:43 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Seagrave and Grisso (2001) questioned the clinical-forensic utility of tests designed to assess juvenile psychopathy. They discussed potential problems with such tests and some avenues for future research. We agree with the points made by Seagrave and Grisso, but believe their critique did not go far enough. The "state of the art" with respect to the assessment of juvenile psychopathy is like an Impressionist painting: fine from a distance; but the closer you get, the messier it looks. We conclude that although tests of "juvenile psychopathy" measure something, it is impossible to be sure at this time they are actually measuring psychopathy.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Stephen D. Hart et al.</author>


<category>Forensic Psychiatry</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Predictive validity of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version for general and violent recidivism</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/28</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/28</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:42 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Several authors have expressed concern regarding the use of youth psychopathy assessments in determinations of risk for general and violent offending. The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) was completed with 182 male adolescent offenders in this prospective study (average 14.5 month follow-up) of general and violent recidivism. Both a two-factor and three-factor model of the PCL:YV significantly predicted general and violent recidivism at a predictive accuracy ranging from 68 to 63%. However, regression analyses indicated these associations were explained primarily by behavioral psychopathic symptoms, rather than interpersonal or affective traits. Implications for the use of psychopathy assessments for risk during adolescence are discussed.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Raymond R. Corrado et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Psychological Tests</category>

<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Risk/Needs Tools for Antisocial Behavior and Violence Among Youthful Populations</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/27</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/27</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:41 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Citation: Vincent, G.M., Terry, A., & Maney, S. (2009). Risk/needs tools for antisocial behavior and violence among youthful populations. In J. Andrade (Ed.) Handbook of Violence Risk Assessment and Treatment:  New Approaches for Forensic Mental Health Practitioners. New York: Springer, p. 377-423. ISBN 0826199038, 9780826199034.</p>
<p>Limited preview of Chapter 12 available via Google Books.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>The PCL: YV and recidivism in male and female juveniles: a follow-up into young adulthood</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/26</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/26</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:40 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Adolescents, and most recently, adolescent females, have emerged as an important population in violence risk assessment and have sparked a debate regarding the downward and gendered extension of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV). This article evaluates the differential prediction of the three and four-factor models of the PCL:YV for male (n=201) and female (n=55) juvenile offenders using a prospective four and one-half year follow-up (M=3 years) study. Both models of the PCL:YV were significant predictors for boys; however, contrary to findings from studies using shorter follow-up periods, the predictive power was due primarily to the behavioral features of psychopathy. The PCL:YV was not a significant predictor of non-violent or violent recidivism for girls. This study does not lend support for the use of the PCL:YV as a risk factor for girl offenders. More research is needed to understand the application of the psychopathy construct in youth, particularly in girls.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Prisoners</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Pyschopathy in Childhood and Adolescence: Implications for the Assessment and Management of Multi-Problem Youths</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/25</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/25</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:39 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Citation: Vincent, G.M. & Hart, S.D. (2002). Pyschopathy in childhood and adolescence: Implications for the assessment and management of multi-problem youths. In R.R. Corrado, R. Roesch, S.D. Hart, & J.K. Gierowski (Eds.), Multi-problem violent youth: A foundation for comparative research on needs, intervention, and outcomes (pp. 150-163). Amsterdam: IOS Press. ISBN 158603071X, 9781586030711</p>
<p>Limited preview of the chapter is available via Google Books.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Adolescent Behavior</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Risk Factors</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Assessing Adolescent Defendants&apos; Adjudicative Competence: Interrater Reliability and Factor Structure of the Fitness Interview Test–Revised</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/23</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/23</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:38 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>As a result of changing legal standards, forensic clinicians have a greater likelihood of being faced with the task of assessing adolescents' adjudicative competence. This study examines the reliability and factor structure of the Fitness Interview Test, Revised Edition (FIT-R), in 152 male and female defendants ages 11 to 17. The interrater reliability of items and sections on the FIT-R is good. Most intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for items fall between .60 and .91, and ICCs for section summary scores range from .82 to .91. Consistent with the design of the FIT-R, confirmatory factor analysis supports a three-factor model, which includes understanding and reasoning about legal proceedings, appreciation of the charges and possible consequences of proceedings, and the ability to communicate with counsel. These factors are united by a dominant superordinate factor. Recommendations are made regarding the clinical use of the FIT-R in the assessment of adolescent competency.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Jodi L. Viljoen et al.</author>


<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Competency</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>A Comparison of Factor Models on the PCL-R With Mentally Disordered Offenders: The Development of a Four-Factor Model</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/22</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/22</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:37 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>For more than a decade, researchers and practitioners have generally accepted a two-factor model for the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) composed of core personality features and an antisocial lifestyle. Very recently, Cooke and Michie (2001) proposed a three-factor solution that divided the core personality features into two dimensions while eliminating antisocial behavior. This study of male, mentally disordered offenders (N = 96) directly compared factor models via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). When using testlets to combine theoretically similar items into single ratings, the nested three-factor model was an excellent fit. Of importance, the development of a four-factor model with the inclusion of antisocial items also produced an excellent fit. Combined with recent research, these findings have important ramifications for the construct validity of the PCL-R.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Michael J. Vitacco et al.</author>


<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Violence</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Juvenile Psychopathy: A Clinical Construct in Need of Restraint?</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/21</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/21</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:36 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Interest in psychopathic traits and their potential applicability to youths appears to be increasing precipitously in the social sciences. Although research on the causes, correlates, and course of traits that appear phenotypically similar to adult psychopathy potentially may inform clinical and legal decision making for youths some day, there are numerous problems with taking measures of these putative traits “outside the lab” at present. This article highlights several unresolved questions regarding juvenile psychopathy that seriously limit its applied utility in clinical and forensic decision making. Examiners who plan to use instruments intended to measure this construct among youths are advised to be familiar with these limitations and their implications for practice.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Forensic Psychiatry</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Antisocial Personality Disorder</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Assessing Risk for Inappropriate Sexual Behavior: Advice from the 2006 Mentally Ill/Problematic Sexual Behavior Program Summit</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/20</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/20</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:35 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	
	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent</author>


</item>






<item>
<title>Risk-Needs Assessment in Juvenile Justice: Predictive Validity of the SAVRY, Racial Differences, and the Contribution of Needs Factors</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/19</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/19</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:34 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>The authors conducted a prospective study of the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) using a 5-year follow-up period and a sample of 480 male adolescents assessed by juvenile detention personnel. Analyses were conducted to examine differential validity by race-ethnicity, the relative contribution of structured professional judgments of risk level, and the incremental validity of dynamic to static risk factors. Overall, the SAVRY total scores were significantly predictive of any type of reoffending with some variability across racial-ethnic groups. Youths rated as moderate to high risk by evaluators using structured professional judgment had greater odds of rearrest, but these risk ratings did not have incremental validity over numeric scores. Static factors were most strongly predictive of nonviolent rearrest, but dynamic factors (social-contextual) were the most predictive of violent rearrest. Implications for use of risk-needs assessment tools in juvenile justice programs and areas in need of further investigation are discussed.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Violence</category>

<category>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

<category>Risk Assessment</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Mental Health Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/18</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/18</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:33 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Citation: Grisso, T., Vincent, G., & Seagrave, D. (eds.) (2005).  Handbook of mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice.   New York: Guilford Press. ISBN 1593851324, 9781593851323.</p>
<p>Summary: A complete, authoritative guide for professionals charged with identifying the mental health needs of juveniles in the justice system, this volume offers a practical primer on screening and assessment together with in-depth reviews of over 20 widely used instruments. The book describes how to put screening and assessment programs into place in juvenile justice settings in order to determine whether youth require specialized mental health treatment services, evaluate violence risks, develop more effective rehabilitation plans, and address specific forensic questions. Chapters on specific instruments--many of which are written by the test developers themselves--follow a consistent format for ease of reference and comparison. Coverage encompasses the psychometric properties of each measure, its recommended applications, and administration and scoring procedures, including an illustrative case example.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Thomas Grisso et al.</author>


<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Adolescent Psychology</category>

<category>Adolescent Behavior</category>

<category>Psychological Tests</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

</item>






<item>
<title>Sex and race differences in mental health symptoms in juvenile justice: the MAYSI-2 national meta-analysis</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/17</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/gina_vincent/17</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:24:32 PST</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>OBJECTIVE: Studies have suggested a high prevalence of mental health symptoms among youths in the juvenile justice system, with the highest prevalence among girls and whites compared to boys and other races. This multisite, archival study examined whether sex and race differences, when they exist, were consistent across U.S. juvenile justice programs.</p>
<p>METHOD: Data included scores on the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2) for 70,423 youths from 283 juvenile justice probation, detention, or corrections programs. A meta-analytic technique investigated the consistency of effect sizes for sex and race/ethnic differences across sites in self-reported mental health problems;</p>
<p>RESULTS: Across sites, girls on average were 1.8 (95% confidence interval 0.98-1.10) to 2.4 (95% confidence interval 2.38-2.48) times as likely as boys to have clinical elevations on all applicable MAYSI-2 scales except the Alcohol/Drug Use scale. On the Alcohol/Drug Use scale, a sex effect existed but only among youngeryouths. Whites were more likely to have clinical elevations than blacks or Hispanics; but surprisingly disparities varied across mental health categories and varied considerably across sites.</p>
<p>CONCLUSION: At the aggregate level, 72% of girls and 63% of boys had a clinical elevation on at least one MAYSI-2 scale. Our meta-analytic technique indicated that the sex differences across sites were even larger than these numbers imply. Conversely and counter to existing evidence, race-related differences were generally small or nonexistent. Whites were more likely to have alcohol and drug problems and suicide ideation, but not more likely to have symptoms of depression, anxiety, or thought disturbance than blacks or Hispanics.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>Gina M. Vincent et al.</author>


<category>Risk Factors</category>

<category>Prisoners</category>

<category>Mental Disorders</category>

<category>Juvenile Delinquency</category>

</item>





</channel>
</rss>
