Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29183655›Full record

ReviewTrends in cognitive sciences2018

Predicting Violent Behavior: What Can Neuroscience Add?

Russell A Poldrack, John Monahan, Peter B Imrey, Valerie Reyna, Marcus E Raichle, David Faigman, Joshua W Buckholtz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cognitive sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Russell A PoldrackDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. Electronic address: poldrack@stanford.edu.
John MonahanSchool of Law, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Peter B ImreyDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Valerie ReynaHuman Neuroscience Institute, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Marcus E RaichleMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA.
David FaigmanUniversity of California Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Joshua W BuckholtzDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Funding

The Gist of Hot and Cold Cognition in Adolescents Risky Decision MakingR01NR014368 · NINR · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI REYNA, VALERIE FRANCES · 2012 to 2014
$1.8M
NINR NIH HHS R01 NR014368
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to accurately predict violence and other forms of serious antisocial behavior would provide important societal benefits, and there is substantial enthusiasm for the potential predictive accuracy of neuroimaging techniques. Here, we review the current status of violence prediction using actuarial and clinical methods, and assess the current state of neuroprediction. We then outline several questions that need to be addressed by future studies of neuroprediction if neuroimaging and other neuroscientific markers are to be successfully translated into public policy.

Indexed as

NeurosciencesViolenceAntisocial Personality DisorderHumanscrimemachine learningneuroimagingpredictive modelingviolence

Identifiers

PMID29183655
PMCPMC5794654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.