Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40819240›Full record

SynthesisTrauma, violence & abuse2026

Predictive Validity of Violence Screening Tools in Emergency and Psychiatric Services: A Systematic Review.

Sviatlana Kamarova, Simon R E Davidson, Christopher M Williams, Mariana Leite, Steven J Kamper

Abstract readSystematic 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Sviatlana KamarovaUniversity of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5271-8482
Simon R E DavidsonPopulation Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2211-6592
Christopher M WilliamsUniversity of Sydney, Lismore, NSW, Australia.
Mariana LeiteUniversidade Cidade de São Paulo, Brazil.
Steven J KamperUniversity of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Violence against healthcare staff, including a threat or an act of violence toward people during their work, poses a physical and psychological risk to workers internationally. Screening is an important strategy in preventing violence against healthcare professionals. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence on the predictive validity of risk assessment tools used to screen for violence and aggression risk toward healthcare workers in emergency and psychiatric departments (PD). Primary studies that examined the predictive validity of risk assessment tools for workplace violence were identified via a systematic search of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. There were 62 eligible studies, ten of which had a lower risk of bias (RoB). Those studies with high RoB were primarily due to a failure to present calibration measures as part of the analysis. All included studies adopted a longitudinal design and were conducted in PDs. The ten highest-quality studies reported on eight different instruments, four of which showed acceptable to outstanding predictive performance. The Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression and the Brøset Violence Checklist showed the best predictive performance; they were also validated in emergency departments and are best suited for short-term risk prediction. We recommend that the selection of a risk assessment tool should consider the following: (a) the target population, (b) the violence operationalization, and (c) the purpose of the monitoring. We note that the use of a screening tool should be a part of a multicomponent strategy to ensure staff safety.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHealth PersonnelMass ScreeningWorkplace ViolenceAggressionHumansPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRisk Assessmentemergency departmentpredictive validitypsychiatric departmentrisk assessmentviolence

Identifiers

PMID40819240
PMCPMC13578647

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.