Paper Agent CC BY 4.0

Dynamic prediction of reoffending in individuals given community sentences: Development and validation of a novel risk monitoring assessment tool (oxMore).

Denis Yukhnenko; Nigel Blackwood; Paul Lichtenstein; Seena Fazel

Publication record checked · 2026-09-30

No retraction, withdrawal, or expression-of-concern flag was found in Europe PMC at this check. This is a source-status check, not an assessment of research quality.

Live workspace

Ask the licensed paper

Ready now

Ask this paper

Ready · 306 searchable passages · Repository extract

Paper Agent

Agent platform credit

Dr. Freedom Cheteni · Editor in Chief

Research University Journal · JournalOS conception and editorial stewardship

https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3507-0094

This ORCID identifies the human contributor to the agent platform. Source-paper authors retain their own authorship and identifiers.

Attribution · TASL

Title: Dynamic prediction of reoffending in individuals given community sentences: Development and validation of a novel risk monitoring assessment tool (oxMore).
Author: Denis Yukhnenko; Nigel Blackwood; Paul Lichtenstein; Seena Fazel
Source: Law and human behavior · DOI 10.1037/lhb0000641 Published 2025-12-04 · Open source record
License: CC BY 4.0 deed

Text preparation and changes

JournalOS created a plain-text search index from the linked open repository record. Markup and layout are removed, whitespace is normalized, and results select and reorder otherwise unchanged passages. Open the canonical source to verify complete context.

Coverage: repository text extract. Verify context in the canonical source. Not clinical advice or emergency support.

Source context

Abstract Objective This study aimed to develop and validate a dynamic risk assessment tool for individuals serving community sentences that accounts for the effects of acute adverse events and desistance from crime. Hypotheses Dynamic risk prediction models that incorporate updated data on mental health relapses, incidents of victimization, and desistance from crime will produce more accurate risk stratification for reoffending than models lacking dynamic measurement of risk factors. Method We analyzed a national cohort of 59,676 individuals given community sentences in Sweden, of whom 23,879 (45%) had prior psychiatric diagnoses and 18,546 (31%) had substance use disorder diagnoses. Model development tested prespecified criminal history, sociodemographic, and clinical risk factors. Employing landmarking methods for time-to-event data, we modeled the effects of new health care episodes during community supervision, changes in a supervised individual’s circumstances, and the impact of crime desistance. We validated the model in a geographically distinct population. Results During follow up, 18,307 (31%) were reconvicted, 4,416 (7%) committed a violent offense, and 5,381 (9%) were hospitalized with a psychiatric diagnosis. The model demonstrated strong calibration and discrimination performance (c-index = 0.74 for violent reoffending, c-index = 0.69 for general reoffending). It also outperformed comparison models that did not incorporate dynamic data. The final model was translated into an online risk calculator (OxMore). Conclusions Implementation of dynamic models could lead to more accurate risk stratification for individuals under community supervision, including those with psychiatric and substance use disorders, potentially improving resource allocation, and linkage to interventions that reduce recidivism rates. Keywords: probation, dynamic risk assessment, psychiatric disorders, community supervision, reoffending prediction

How this agent works

It searches a plain-text extract of the linked open repository record. It returns matching source passages and refuses to invent an answer when the indexed record is silent.

Original journal: Law and human behavior
Published: 2025-12-04
DOI: 10.1037/lhb0000641
Open record: PMC7618717

Read full article Open PDF Canonical source License deed

The original authors and American Psychological Association do not endorse this journal or its agent. Verify findings in the canonical article before making consequential decisions.