We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Acute health and social services for children and adolescents often struggle with youth aggression and violence. Early identification of violence risk during institutional stay can help prevent violent incidents. As such, this study assessed the predictive accuracy of the Violence Risk Assessment Checklist for Youth (V-RISK-Y) aged 12–18 in two different juvenile settings providing 24-hour services for youth. Institutions were included from child and adolescent inpatient psychiatry and residential youth care under child protective services.
Methods
A prospective, naturalistic observational study design was employed. V-RISK-Y was administered for youth admitted to four acute inpatient psychiatric units and four acute residential youth care institutions. Incidents of violence and threats during the youth’s stay were registered by institutional staff. In total, 517 youth were included in analyses, 59 of whom were registered with at least one incident of violence or threats during their stay. Area under curve (AUC) and logistic regression analyses were used to assess predictive accuracy and validity of V-RISK-Y.
Results
For the overall sample, V-RISK-Y had good predictive accuracy, and the sum score of V-RISK-Y significantly predicted registered violent incidents. Stratified analyses indicated good predictive accuracy of V-RISK-Y for the inpatient units, but not for the residential youth care institutions.
Conclusions
Findings imply that V-RISK-Y is accurate in identifying violence risk for youth admitted to inpatient psychiatric units but has limited predictive accuracy in residential youth care institutions. Future research should explore approaches to correctly identify violence risk in residential care settings.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.