Table 4.
Overview of the Item Content of 10 Violence Risk Assessment Tools Developed for Psychiatric Populations and the Reporting Characteristics of Their Outpatient Prediction Literatures
Scale | Grading Criteria | Risk Assessment Tool |
|||||||||
COVR | HCR-20 | HKT-30 | SAPROF | SORM | START | UK700 | VRAG | V-RISK-10 | VRS | ||
Item content | Static factors included | • | • | • | • | — | — | • | • | • | • |
Dynamic factors included | • | • | • | • | • | • | — | — | • | • | |
Risk factors included | • | • | • | — | • | • | • | • | • | • | |
Protective factors included | — | — | — | • | • | • | • | • | — | — | |
Validitya | Predictive validity tested prospectively | • | • | • | — | • | — | — | • | • | • |
Predictive validity tested in civil psychiatric patients | • | • | • | — | — | — | • | • | • | — | |
Predictive validity tested in forensic psychiatric patients | — | • | • | • | • | • | — | • | — | • | |
Convergent validity tested | — | • | • | • | — | • | — | • | — | • | |
Divergent validity tested | — | • | — | • | — | • | — | — | — | • | |
Reliabilitya | Interrater reliability tested | —b | • | • | • | • | • | — | • | • | • |
Internal consistency tested | —c | • | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Note: Abbreviations are explained in the first footnote to table 1.
In the context of predicting the likelihood of community violence.
As the COVR is administered using computer software and self-report, the instrument’s interrater reliability cannot be evaluated.
As the COVR uses an iterative classification tree to assess violence risk, the item content on the instrument will differ depending on the individual. Therefore, internal consistency cannot be evaluated.