The Use of Structured Professional Judgement: A New Way to Understand and Assess Bite Risk from Dogs

Dog bite incidents constitute significant public health, animal welfare, and economic concerns with substantial physical and psychological consequences for victims. Despite legislative responses, research indicates that breed-focused interventions are ineffective in reducing dog bite risk. Human behaviour, caregiving practices, and environmental context all play central roles in the expression of human-directed canine aggression. Current methods of assessing dog bite risk remain largely unstructured, dog-centred, and reliant on subjective judgement and provocative behavioural testing. These approaches exhibit limited predictive validity and poor reliability, and are vulnerable to bias, raising serious concerns for public safety, judicial fairness, and animal welfare. Comparable challenges in human violence risk assessment led to the development of an evidence-based structured professional judgement (SPJ) assessment framework, which combines empirical risk factors with individualised case formulation and dynamic risk management. An SPJ framework for dog bite risk would ensure the systematic consideration of empirically supported static and dynamic risk factors relating to the dog, caregivers, and related environmental conditions, while supporting the development of targeted risk reduction strategies. Conclusion: Developing an SPJ approach offers a more scientifically grounded, ethically defensible, and prevention-focused method for managing dog bite risk, with potential benefits for public safety, animal welfare, and professional practice.