ArticlePsychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law2024
Gender responsivity in the assessment and treatment of offenders.
Article in Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Client and Practitioner Insights into Treatment for Women Convicted of Child Sexual Abuse: A Qualitative Study Informing Gender-Responsive Practice.Sexual abuse : a journal of research and treatment · 2026Article
- Measuring the callous-unemotional traits in Spanish juvenile offenders: properties and functioning of the INCA questionnaire in this population.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026Article
- Substance use disorders, severe mental illness and risk of reoffending among women released from prison: a national cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk assessment tools used to assess justice-involved women have been predominantly developed using male offenders, with validations for females having mixed results. Female-specific risk assessment tools are not well established, and validations are limited. In terms of treatment, either programmes in various jurisdictions have been developed specifically for females, or addendums are available to assist in the facilitation of programmes initially developed for male offenders. The efficacy of these has been varied with gender-responsive programmes proving to be more successful in the reduction of reoffending if justice-involved women follow a gender-specific pathway to offending than if they follow a non-gender-specific pathway. This paper discusses gender differences in offending and provides an overview of assessment and treatment of justice-involved women in Australia, the UK, New Zealand and Canada. The assessment and treatment practices for justice-involved women are viewed through an evidence-based lens, and opportunities for future development are identified.
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.