Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGale, T.M.
dc.contributor.authorWoodward, A.
dc.contributor.authorHawley, C.
dc.contributor.authorHayes, J.
dc.contributor.authorSivakumaran, T.
dc.contributor.authorHansen, G.
dc.date.accessioned2010-02-10T11:44:43Z
dc.date.available2010-02-10T11:44:43Z
dc.date.issued2002
dc.identifier.citationGale , T M , Woodward , A , Hawley , C , Hayes , J , Sivakumaran , T & Hansen , G 2002 , ' Risk assessment for people with mental health problems: a pilot study of reliability in working practice ' International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice , vol. 6 , no. 2 , pp. 73-81 . https://doi.org/10.1080/136515002753724063
dc.identifier.issn1365-1501
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 193306
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 926a5bc1-2fd0-42cd-b60b-5f60672a9383
dc.identifier.otherdspace: 2299/4250
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 0036272152
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/4250
dc.descriptionOriginal article can be found at: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713657515 Copyright Informa / Taylor and Francis Group. DOI: 10.1080/136515002753724063 [Full text of this article is not available in the UHRA]
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION : This paper describes a pilot study of reliability in the risk assessment of people with mental health problems. Specifically, we explore the evidence for professional and gender bias in ratings, in addition to the general level of agreement between raters. METHOD : Six professional groups (psychiatrists, junior psychiatric doctors, nurses, community psychiatric nurses, social workers and occupational therapists) participated in the study and rated 159 patients on a nine-item scale which assessed different components of risk. RESULTS : Contrary to some earlier work, we found no clear evidence that any one group consistently rated more extremely than any other group. Women were more cautious than men in their ratings, and this concurs with previous studies. Finally, a reliability study of randomly selected pairs of raters showed only moderate levels of agreement and, in some instances, the levels of disagreement were high enough to warrant concern. CONCLUSION : These findings are discussed in the context of current risk assessment practice and the problems associated with investigating reliability in naturalistic settings and designing appropriate rating tools for risk.en
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice
dc.titleRisk assessment for people with mental health problems: a pilot study of reliability in working practiceen
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Psychology
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.1080/136515002753724063
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue
herts.rights.accesstyperestrictedAccess


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record