A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness.

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences Pub Date : 2025-02-20 DOI:10.1017/S2045796025000058
S Kisely, C Bull, N Gill
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness.","authors":"S Kisely, C Bull, N Gill","doi":"10.1017/S2045796025000058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>There has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>On the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.</p>","PeriodicalId":11787,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","volume":"34 ","pages":"e12"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796025000058","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: There has been concern about violent acts and other criminal behaviour by people with a possible history of mental health problems. We therefore assessed the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) on self-, third-party-, and agency-reported criminal behaviour when compared to voluntary treatment.

Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and criminal justice bibliographic databases for observational or randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CTO cases with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. Relevant outcomes were reports of violence and aggression or contacts with the criminal justice system such as arrests and court appearances.

Results: Thirteen papers from 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Nine papers came from the United States and four from Australia. Two papers were of RCTs. Results for all outcomes were non-significant, the effect size declining as study design improved from non-randomised data on self-reported criminal behaviour, through third party criminal justice records and finally to RCTs. Similarly, there was no significant finding in the subgroup analysis of serious criminal behaviour.

Conclusions: On the limited available evidence, CTOs may not address aggression or criminal behaviour in people with mental illness. This is possibly because the risk of violence is increased by comorbid or nonclinical variables, which are beyond the scope of CTOs. These include substance use, a history of victimisation or maltreatment, and the wider environment. The management of risk should therefore focus on the whole person and their community through social and public health interventions, not solely legislative control.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
1.20%
发文量
121
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences is a prestigious international, peer-reviewed journal that has been publishing in Open Access format since 2020. Formerly known as Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale and established in 1992 by Michele Tansella, the journal prioritizes highly relevant and innovative research articles and systematic reviews in the areas of public mental health and policy, mental health services and system research, as well as epidemiological and social psychiatry. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in these critical fields.
期刊最新文献
Increased risk of suicide among patients with social anxiety disorder. Towards person-centered care in global mental health: implications for meta-analyses and clinical trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of community treatment orders on aggression or criminal behaviour in people with a mental illness. Internet gaming disorder and depression mediated by impaired resilience and sleep distress: a three-wave longitudinal study among Chinese adolescents. Treatment rates and delays for mental and substance use disorders: results from the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1