Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40567160›Full record

SynthesisTrauma, violence & abuse2026

Quantitative Outcomes for Shared Assessment and Management in Forensic Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Mimosa Luigi, Xavier Larochelle, Anne G Crocker

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Mimosa LuigiMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9862-2411
Xavier LarochelleInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Anne G CrockerInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0571-8890

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite leading models of mental health care encouraging user involvement, users in forensic mental health (FMH) report poor involvement given the difficulty in reconciling shared approaches with risk-averse and legally mandated settings. While previous research has demonstrated qualitative benefits to shared approaches in FMH and has led to a proliferation of self-rated assessment tools, there remains to quantify agreement on self-rated tools and to clarify the impact of shared approaches on care. This meta-analysis examines (1) the correlation between clinician and user ratings, (2) the predictive validity of self-ratings for violence, and (3) the effects of shared risk management on violence and restriction in FMH. Five databases were searched from inception to April 2024, selecting for adult FMH inpatients, shared risk assessment, needs assessment or violence management as interventions, and quantitative outcomes (correlation, agreement, predictive validity, and effect on violence or restriction rates). Fifteen quantitative evaluations were retained. One of three planned meta-analyses could be conducted, with seven records providing paired clinician-user

Indexed as

Forensic PsychiatryMental DisordersMental Health ServicesHumansRisk AssessmentViolenceforensic mental healthpatient ratedshared approachesshared decision-makingshared risk formulationuser involvementviolence

Identifiers

PMID40567160
PMCPMC13578661

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.