You are on page 1of 9

Interrater Reliability of the SAVRY

Study SAVRY SAVRY

Risk Total ICC Risk Judgment ICC

McEachran, 2001 .83 .72

Catchpole & Gretton, 2003 .81 .77

Dolan & Rennie, 2008 .97 .88

Lodewijks et al., 2008-b .81 .77

Meyers & Schmidt, 2008 .97 .95

Vilojen, et al., 2008 .91 N/A

ICC = Intraclass Correlation Coefficient


Studies of the predictive validity of the SAVRY on institutional or

community violent recidivism

Study Design Strength of association

Gammelgård, Eronen, & Institutional violence Violent incidents:

Kaltiala-Heino (2007) Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .71**

N = 147 (boys and girls)

Gammelgård, Weitzman- Community violence Violent incidents:

Henelius, & Kaltiala-Heino Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .71**

(2008) N = 208 (boys and girls) Risk Total, OR = 27.85 (high-low)

Risk Total, OR = 3.83 (mod-low)

Lodewijks, Doreleijers, De Institutional violence Violent incidents:

Ruiter, & Borum (2008-b) Prospective study Risk Total, AUC = .80***
N = 66 (boys) Risk Rating, AUC = .86***

Follow-up: 18 months Aggressive incidents:

Risk Total, AUC = .73*

Catchpole & Gretton Community violence Violent recidivism:

(2003) Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .73**

N = 66 (90% boys)

Follow-up: 12 months post

release

Dolan & Rennie (2008) Community violence Violent recidivism:

Prospective study Risk Total, AUC = .64*

N = 99 (boys) Risk Rating, AUC = .64*

Follow-up: 6 months post General recidivism:

release Risk Total, AUC = .69*

Risk Rating, AUC = .69*

Fitch (2002) Community violence Males: Risk Total, r = .50**:

Retrospective study Females: Risk Total, r = .72***

N = 82 (47 boys, 35 girls) Males and females:


Follow-up: 18 months Risk Total, r = 56**

Gretton &Abramowitz Community violence Violent recidivism:

(2002) Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .67*

N = 176 (94% boys) Risk Rating, AUC = .74**

Follow-up: 12 months

Hilterman (2007) Community violence Violent recidivism:

Prospective study Risk Total, AUC = .78**

N = 85 (72 boys; 13 girls) Risk Rating, AUC = .74**

Follow-up: 10 -18 months

Lodewijks, De Ruiter, & Community violence Violent recidivism: Risk Total,

Doreleijers (2008-c) Prospective study AUC = .76** (boys); .84* (girls)

N = 82 (47 boys, 35 girls) Risk Rating,

Follow-up: 18 months post AUC = .82*** (boys); .85*** (girls)

release

Lodewijks, Doreleijers, & Community violence Violent recidivism:


De Ruiter (2008-a Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .65*

N = 117 ( 95% boys) Risk Rating, AUC = .71*

Follow-up: 36 months

McEachran (2001) Community violence Violent recidivism:

Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .70*

N = 108 (boys) Risk Rating, AUC = .89**

Follow-up after release: 36

months

Myers & Schmidt (2008) Community violence (Statistical significance levels not reported)

Prospective study Violent recidivism:

N = 121 Risk Total (1yr), AUC = .66

Follow-up: 1 yr and 3 yr Risk Total (3yr), AUC = .77

General recidivism:

Risk Total (1yr), AUC = .75

Risk Total (3yr), AUC = .76

Non-violent recidivism:

Risk Total (1yr), AUC = .80

Risk Total (3yr), AUC = .68


Rieger, Stadtland, Community violence Violent recidivism:

Freisleder, & Nedopil Retrospective study Risk Total, AUC = .69*

(2006) N = 89 (boys)

Follow-up: 12 months

Viljoen, Scalora, Ullman, Institutional Offending & Sexual aggression during treatment:

Cuadra, Bader, Chavez, & Community Offending Risk Total, AUC = .52

Lawrence (2008). Prospective study Risk Rating, AUC = .51

N = 169 boys adjudicated for Non-sexual aggression during treatment:

sexual offenses Risk Total, AUC = .69***

Follow-up: 1 yr in Tx Risk Rating, AUC = .59

6.5 yrs in community Sexual offense in community:

Risk Total, AUC = .53

Risk Rating, AUC = .51

Serious non-sexual violent offense in community:

Risk Total, AUC = .69*

Risk Rating, AUC = .56


Any offense in community:

Risk Total, AUC = .58

Risk Rating, AUC = .50

Welsh, et al (2008) Community violence (Statistical significance levels not reported)

Prospective study Violent recidivism:

N = 133 Risk Total AUC = .81

Avg. Follow-up: = 35.8 months General recidivism:

Risk Total AUC = .77

Note. AUC = Area Under the Curve. OR = Odds Ratio. r = Pearson correlation coefficient.
*
p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 (two-tailed).
References
Borum, R., Bartel, P., & Forth, A. (2005). Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY). In T. Grisso, G. Vincent, & D.
Seagrave (Eds.), Mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice (pp. 311-323). New York: Guilford.

Catchpole, R., & Gretton, H. (2003). The predictive validity of risk assessment with violent young offenders: A 1-year examination of
criminal outcome. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 688-708.

Chapman, J.F., Desai, R.A., Falzer, P.R., & Borum, R. (2006). Violence risk and race in a sample of youth in juvenile detention: The
potential to reduce disproportionate minority confinement. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4, 170-184.

Dolan, M. C., & Rennie, C. E. (2008). The Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) as a predictor of recidivism in
a UK cohort of adolescent offenders with conduct disorder. Psychological Assessment, 20, 35-46.

Fitch, D. (2004). Analysis of common risk factors for violent behavior in native American adolescents referred for residential
treatment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas-Clear Lake.

Gammelgård, M., Weitzman-Henelius, G., & Kaltiala-Heino, R. (2008). The predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of
Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) among institutionalised adolescents. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 19, 352 – 370.

Gretton, H., & Abramowitz, C. (2002, March). SAVRY: Contribution of items and scales to clinical risk judgments and criminal
outcomes. Paper presented at the American Psychology and Law Society, Biennial Conference, Austin, TX.

Hilterman, E. (2007, June). Use of SAVRY by clinicians and its relation with recidivism by juveniles in Catalonia, Spain. Paper
presented at the meeting of the International Association of Forensic Mental Health Services, Montreal, Canada.

Lodewijks, H. P. B., Doreleijers, Th. A. H., & Ruiter, C. de (in press-a). SAVRY risk assessment in a Dutch sample of violent
adolescents: Relation to sentencing and recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior.

Lodewijks, H. P. B., Doreleijers, Th. A. H., Ruiter, C. de, & Borum, R. (2008).
Predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) during residential treatment. International
Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 31, 263-271.
Lodewijks, H. P. B., Ruiter, C. de, & Doreleijers, Th. A. H. (in press-c). Gender differences in risk assessment and violent outcome
after juvenile residential treatment. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health.

McEachran, A. (2001). The predictive validity of the PCL:YV and the SAVRY in a population of adolescent offenders. Unpublished
Master’s thesis. Burnaby, British Columbia: Simon Fraser University.

Mcgowan, M. R. (2007). The predictive validity of violence risk assessment within educational settings. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Northern Arizona University.

Meyers, J. & Schmidt, F. (2008). Predictive validity of the Structured Assessment for Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) with juvenile
offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 344-355.

Rieger, M., Stadtland, C., Freisleder, F. J., & Nedopil, N. (2006, June). The predictive validity of risk assessment instruments SAVRY
and PCL: YV in a German sample of adolescent offenders. Paper presented to the 6th Annual International Association of Forensic
Mental Health Services Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Roth, E. (2006). Roth, Eric Vaughn. Assessment of violence risk and psychopathy in a population of incarcerated, adolescent,
hispanic males. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

Viljoen, J., Scalora, M., Cuadra, L., Bader, S., Chavez, V., Ullman, D., & Lawrence, L. (2008). Assessing risk for violence in
adolescents who have sexually offended: A comparison of the J-SOAP-II, J-SORRAT-II, and SAVRY. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 35(1), 5-23.

Welsh J., Schmidt F, McKinnon L, Chattha H., Meyers J. (2008). A comparative study of adolescent risk assessment instruments:
predictive and incremental validity. Assessment, 15, 104-15.

Witt, P. (2002). Review of Manual for the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY ). Journal of Psychiatry & Law,
30(4), 599-603.