Search results

This critical review considers the limitations and advantages of the clinical, actuarial and structured clinical judgement approaches as they are applied to the assessment of risk in general and sex‐offenders in particular. It concludes by endorsing an inclusive approach, acknowledging that a central ethic of clinical practice is that it should be based on a current knowledge of the research literature (Singer, cited in Douglas et al. 1999).

The aim of this paper is to provide up‐to‐date discussion of the types of factors used to assess sexual offenders risk.

The current status of the factors used to assess risk in sexual offenders is examined.

Risk factors broadly fall into two categories: static factors (i.e. generally unchangeable information such as previous offence history) from which a number of actuarial scales have been developed; and dynamic factors (i.e. psychological dispositions) that are typically identified in treatment. It is suggested that these risk factors are artefacts of the same behavioural and psychological vulnerabilities at different stages of assessment, with static factors acting as markers for underlying dispositions, while dynamic factors are the underlying dispositions.

The paper discusses in some detail the status of age as a risk factor, where even though it is typically considered a static risk factor in a number of actuarial scales (allowance typically being made if individuals are over/under 25), there is a dynamic element (i.e. change with age or the passage of time) to this aspect of assessment.

This paper may be useful to practitioners working in the field, in terms of providing a useful heuristic framework for risk conceptualisation.

The England and Wales National Health Service (NHS) Executive's guidance on the discharge of mentally disordered people, including those with learning disabilities, requires that risk assessment is a component part of the Care Programme Approach (CPA). The guidance indicates that whenever possible, risk assessments should be carried out systematically using a standardised approach. For a number of reasons, practitioners are resistant to moving away from reliance on clinical judgements when making their assessments. This paper explores the issues underlying this tension. A solution is offered to the difficulty clinicians often experience in incorporating risk assessment tools into their clinical practice. A case example is given to illustrate how clinical assessments of offenders with learning disabilities can be utilised to estimate the risks presented. By demonstrating this procedure, a protocol for reaching clinically defensible decisions about the risks presented by clients is described, which also allows for the targeting of priority therapeutic and management interventions.

As a result of the significant influence of actuaries on policy liabilities and the related earnings in the financial statements of a listed South African long‐term insurer, auditors encounter a number of key issues and considerations relating to the incorporation of actuarial expertise in the audit process. Guidance for auditors to address these issues and considerations is discussed in this study. The guidance was developed as a significant element of a wider research project, the objective of which was the development of a best practice framework for the formulation of overall audit strategies for insurance contracts and the related earnings of listed South African long‐term insurers.

Evidence has shown associations between personality disorder (PD) and poor treatment outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to: first, establish which risk assessment method (i.e. structured professional judgement or actuarial) is most reliable for predicting treatment outcomes for individuals with PD. Second, determine whether individuals identified as high risk are more likely to have poorer treatment outcomes. Third, determine if engagement in treatment helps to reduce risk assessment scores.

In total, 50 patients were recruited from a medium secure forensic PD service. Their risk was assessed using one structured professional judgement instrument (the HCR-20) and one actuarial instrument (the RM2000). The study used a retrospective cohort design.

Overall, the HCR-20 was a better predictor of treatment outcome than the RM2000. Personality-disordered offenders with high HCR-20 scores are at an increased risk of adverse treatment outcomes.

This investigation used a small, non-randomised sample of male patients with PD at one South East England medium secure unit. The data were over-represented by white British males. Future research should compare PD offenders with non-PD offenders to investigate what factors best predict poorer treatment outcomes.

The findings indicate that structured professional judgement approaches are more effective predictors of risk than actuarial measures for assessing patients with PD. This study therefore adds value to forensic services and to the risk assessment debate.

The sequelae of acquired brain injury can lead to a complex array of risks. This research explores professionals' perspectives on those risks, focussing on how psycho‐social risks are assessed and managed.

A self completion questionnaire was designed, and distributed to a range of professionals working in brain injury services.

A total of 177 participants completed an anonymous questionnaire. Principal components analysis produced three factors, which were given the labels “User‐friendliness”, “Person‐centeredness” and “Coherence”. Inconsistencies were identified in approaches to risk assessment and management. Participants also reported particular beneficial approaches, such as multi‐disciplinary discussions, and using assessments to guide rehabilitation.

The convenience sampling approach limits the generalisablity of the findings. However, the study was adequately powered, reliable, and valid.

The findings of this research, existing literature, and clinical experience are drawn together in a proposed model for managing risk. This model, which incorporates the three factors identified through statistical analysis could guide effective risk management, documentation and associated procedures. The model presents a framework for service design and provision, as well as providing a focus for future research.

It is likely that more active engagement in risk assessment on the part of professionals, services, and those who access services, will be engendered if the process is able to become more user‐friendly, person‐centred, and coherent, across and within service provision.

Despite legislative calls for regular training and effective communication in relation to risk, this is not the routine experience of professionals working in brain injury services. The findings of the present research offer a new, structured process, for overcoming the challenge for embedding legislation and research findings into practice.

This paper is based on seminar, workshop and lecture materials presented at national and international conferences, and follows an invitation to cover this topic as part of a one‐day conference on mental health issues in autism spectrum disorders (Staufenberg, 2005; 2007). The paper will seek to a) outline a review of the current evidence base and clinical approaches to the appraisal of risk behaviour or aggressive conduct in general and forensic psychiatric practice, before b) reviewing the current issues in the clinical risk appraisal in individuals with complex neurodevelopmental syndromes of the high functioning autism spectrum, and in particular Asperger's syndrome.References based on clinical and structured instrument‐based risk appraisal will also introduce the pertinence of assessing personality traits in individuals with Asperger's syndrome, with specific reference to forensic neuropsychiatry‐based expertise and case vignettes. A discussion of potential research directions and collaborations will conclude this introductory guide to the emerging field of forensic developmental neuropsychiatry.

In recent years, the frequency and severity of cybersecurity incidents have prompted customers to seek out specialized insurance products. However, this has also presented insurers with operational challenges and increased costs. The assessment of risks for health systems and cyber–physical systems (CPS) necessitates a heightened degree of attention. The significant values of potential damages and claims request a solid insurance system, part of cyber-resilience. This research paper focuses on the emerging cyber insurance market that is currently in the process of standardizing and improving its risk analysis concerning the potential insured entity.

The authors' approach involves a quantitative analysis utilizing a Likert-style questionnaire designed to survey cyber insurance professionals. The authors' aim is to identify the current methods used in gathering information from potential clients, as well as the manner in which this information is analyzed by the insurers. Additionally, the authors gather insights on potential improvements that could be made to this process.

The study the authors elaborated it has a particularly important cyber and risk components for insurance area, because it addresses a “niche” area not yet proper addressed in specialized literature – cyber insurance. Cyber risk management approaches are not uniform at the international level, nor at the insurer level. Also, not all insurers can perform solid assessments, especially since their companies should first prove that they are fully compliant with international cyber security standards.

This research has concentrated on analyzing the current practices in terms of gathering information about the insured entity before issuing the cyber insurance policy, level of details concerning the cyber security posture of the insured entity and way such information should be analyzed in a standardized and useful manner. The novelty of this research resides in the analysis performed as detailed above and the proposals in terms of information gathered, depth of analysis and standardization of approach made. Future work on the topic can focus on the standardization process for analyzing cyber risk for insurance clients, to improve the proposal based also on historical elements and trends in the market. Thus, future research can further refine the standardization process to analyze in more depth the way this can be implemented and included in relevant legislation at the EU level.

Proposed improvements include proposals in terms of the level of detail and the usefulness of an independent centralized approach for information gathering and analysis, especially given the re-insurance and brokerage activities. The authors also propose a common practical procedural approach in risk management, with the involvement of insurance companies and certification institutions of cyber security auditors.

The study investigates the information gathered by insurers from potential clients of cyber insurance and the way this is analyzed and updated for issuance of the insurance policy.