Back to News
09/02/2008
Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY)
Within the first half of 2008, six new articles supporting the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) have been published in peer-reviewed journals.
Jennifer Welsh and colleagues studied the predictive and incremental validity of three adolescent risk assessment instruments (SAVRY, Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), and the Psychopathy Checklist:Youth Version (PCL:YV) for assessing risk of general and violent recidivism among a sample of 133 youth court referrals. They concluded that “Of the three instruments investigated, the SAVRY offered the most incremental predictive validity for General Recidivism and Violent Recidivism, whereas the PCL:YV followed closely behind” (p. 111).
Jodi Viljoen and colleagues studied the validity of the SAVRY and to sexual-offense specific risk instruments for juvenile offenders in a sample of 169 male juvenile sexual offenders. While none of the instruments showed a high degree of power in predicting sexual recidivism specifically (in part due to low base rates of detected offenses), the SAVRY Risk Total and Summary Risk Rating performed better than the others in forecasting Serious Non-Sexual Violent offending.
In the March issue of the journal Criminal Justice and Behavior, Joanna Myers and Fred Schmidt published results of their study of the SAVRY’s predictive validity among 121 juvenile offenders at 1-year and 3-year follow-up periods. They note that the SAVRY’s strong predictive validity was “robust in prediction of violent recidivism across gender and ethnicity,” (p. 354) a finding that contributes to knowledge of its usefulness for both males and females.
Dr. Mairead Dolan led a UK-based study of the predictive validity of the SAVRY and the PCL-YV in a sample of 99 conduct disordered adolescent boys. The youth were assessed in custody and followed for 12 months after their discharge. Recidivism was determined solely by official (Home Office) records. “Our results suggest that for violent and general recidivism, the SAVRY was a modest, but better, predictor of recidivism than the PCL: YV. The results of the logistic regression show that both the SAVRY Risk Total and the SAVRY Risk Rating added to the predictive ability of the PCL: YV” (p. 43). Moreover, the SAVRY Summary Risk Rating “was able to differentiate those who were more likely to reoffend and more likely to do so more quickly.”
In the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, Dr. Henny Lodewijks (author of the SAVRY’s Dutch translation) and colleagues published a predictive validity study of the SAVRY and PCL-YV for transgressive behaviors among 66 boys (all with a history of violence) in a secure residential treatment setting. Criteria included physical violence and other institutional disruptive behaviors. Nearly all in the study were involved in at least one recorded incident. They found that “The results of this study provide strong support for the structured professional judgment model of risk assessment in general and for the SAVRY in particular. No systematic bias was found in total risk scores or final risk judgments with regard to age, ethnic origin or intelligence level” (p. 269). This study also adds to the literature on the SAVRY’s validity in institutional settings.
Finally, Gammelgård and colleagues studied the SAVRY’s predictive validity in a sample 208 Finnish adolescents assessed in institutional settings. SAVRYs were coded based on file review and reviewed again six months later to detect and record episodes of institutional violence. They conclude that “the SAVRY is a useful and valid aid for professionals across several service levels when assessing risk of violent behaviour and intervention needs in youth with severe challenging and aggressive behaviours, even though we need further information on the impact of gender and psychopathology on violence risk in youth samples.”
References:
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.
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.
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.
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.
Viljoen, J. L., Scalora, M., Ullman, D., Cuadra, L., Bader, S., Chavez, V., & Lawrence, L. (2008). Assessing risk for violence in adolescents who have sexually offended: A comparison of the J-SOAP-II, SAVRY, and J-SORRAT-II. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 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.