Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 30, 2025

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Predictors of Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR-20:V3) summary risk ratings
Jeremy Cheng1, Andrew M Haag2,3,4, Mark E Olver1
1Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Abstract:
How individual risk factors on structured professional judgement (SPJ) assessment tools translate into SPJ final risk formulations is unclear due to a lack of structured criteria. Understanding pathways to risk formulations is vital, as they serve as intervention targets for risk management. This study examined how Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 (HCR-20:V3) raters weighed varied information sources to complete summary risk ratings (SRRs). Four independent raters retrospectively coded an archived sample of 32 inpatients at a Canadian forensic psychiatric hospital. HCR-20:V3 SPJ SRRs were regressed on the 20 individual items and sample covariates to identify unique predictors of risk formulations across each rater. Raters consistently used HCR-20:V3 items and composite subscales for SRRs. Despite strong inter-rater agreement on the SRRs, there were variations across raters regarding which items informed each SRR. Rater-unique biases were also shown to influence SRRs. Implications for forensic practice and risk management are discussed.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Relative Risk
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Hazard Rate
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

