Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39900785›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2025

Understanding Sexual Burglary.

Hana Georgoulis, Eric Beauregard, Julien Chopin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Hana GeorgoulisSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.
Eric BeauregardSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada. ebeaureg@sfu.ca.
Julien ChopinSchool of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis review includes research on sexual burglary to highlight the distinct behaviours of such offenders. Only recently has there been a thorough examination of the decision-making that goes into this hybrid crime, and the potential for these individuals to progress to more serious and violent criminal acts. RECENT

findingsWork on sexual burglary has found that decisions made during the crime commission reflect rational decision-making and organization, despite previous research suggesting that sexual crimes are mostly impulsive. Furthermore, these rational choices may lead to the development of expertise in sexual burglary, with offenders learning how to avoid detection and engage in forensic awareness strategies. The knowledge that sexual burglars are expert decision-makers has important implications, as these behaviours may lead to more violent and lethal sexual crimes. Identifying these offenders through their decisions and crime characteristics is key to potentially deterring or preventing future offending.

Indexed as

Decision MakingSex OffensesHumansDecision-makingExpertiseReviewSexual burglaryStealingTheft

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.