ArticleBMJ open2021
Societal preferences for the treatment of impulsive-violent offenders: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Sertraline for Preventing Domestic Violence Reoffending Among Highly Impulsive Violent Offenders in Australia: A Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study is to quantify societal preferences for, and assess trade-offs between characteristics of treatment programmes for impulsive-violent offenders.
settingThe study was conducted in New South Wales, Australia's largest state.
participantsThe study participants were income tax payers, aged over 18 and who were able to provide informed consent.
methodsA discrete choice experiment was used to assess the preferences for treatment programmes for impulsive violent offenders. The survey presented participants with six choice sets in which they chose between two unlabelled treatment scenarios and a 'no treatment' choice. A random parameters logistic (RPL) model and a latent class (LC) model were used to analyse the societal preferences for treatment and estimate willingness to pay values based on marginal rates of substitution. Respondents were asked to self-identify if they ever had experiences with violence and subgroup analysis was done.
resultsThe survey was completed by 1021 highly engaged participants. The RPL model showed that society had a preference for more effective programmes, programmes that provided full as opposed to partial treatment of all co-occurring health conditions, compulsory over voluntary programmes, those with flexibility in appointments and programmes that are provided with continuity of care postprison. Respondents were willing to pay an additional annual tax contribution for all significant attributes, particularly compulsory programmes, continuity of treatment and effectiveness.The LC model identified two classes of respondents with some differences in preferences which could be largely identified by whether they had experiences with violence or not.
conclusionThe results are important for future programme design and implementation. Programmes for impulsive violent offenders that are designed to encompass societal preferences are likely to be supported by public and tax payers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.