Anthony J Rosellini1, John Monahan2, Amy E Street3, Maria V Petukhova4, Nancy A Sampson4, David M Benedek5, Paul Bliese6, Murray B Stein7, Robert J Ursano5, Ronald C Kessler8. 1. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. School of Law, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. 3. National Center for PTSD, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina. 7. Departments of Psychiatry and Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California; VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California. 8. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: kessler@hcp.med.harvard.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Department of Defense uses a universal prevention framework for sexual assault prevention, with each branch implementing its own branch-wide programs. Intensive interventions exist, but would be cost effective only if targeted at high-risk personnel. This study developed actuarial models to identify male U.S. Army soldiers at high risk of administratively recorded sexual assault perpetration. METHODS: This study investigated administratively recorded sexual assault perpetration among the 821,807 male Army soldiers serving 2004-2009. Administrative data were also used to operationalize the predictors. Penalized discrete-time (person-month) survival analysis (conducted in 2016) was used to select the smallest possible number of stable predictors to maximize number of sexual assaults among the 5% of soldiers with highest predicted risk of perpetration (top-ventile concentration of risk). Separate models were developed for assaults against non-family and intra-family adults and minors. RESULTS: There were 4,640 male soldiers found to be perpetrators against non-family adults, 1,384 against non-family minors, 380 against intra-family adults, and 335 against intra-family minors. Top-ventile concentration of risk was 16.2%-20.2% predicting perpetration against non-family adults and minors and 34.2%-65.1% against intra-family adults and minors. Final predictors consisted largely of measures of prior crime involvement and the presence and treatment of mental disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative data can be used to develop actuarial models that identify a high proportion of sexual assault perpetrators. If a system is developed to consolidate administrative predictors routinely, then predictions could be generated periodically to identify those in need of preventive intervention. Whether this would be cost effective, though, would depend on intervention costs, effectiveness, and competing risks.
INTRODUCTION: The Department of Defense uses a universal prevention framework for sexual assault prevention, with each branch implementing its own branch-wide programs. Intensive interventions exist, but would be cost effective only if targeted at high-risk personnel. This study developed actuarial models to identify male U.S. Army soldiers at high risk of administratively recorded sexual assault perpetration. METHODS: This study investigated administratively recorded sexual assault perpetration among the 821,807 male Army soldiers serving 2004-2009. Administrative data were also used to operationalize the predictors. Penalized discrete-time (person-month) survival analysis (conducted in 2016) was used to select the smallest possible number of stable predictors to maximize number of sexual assaults among the 5% of soldiers with highest predicted risk of perpetration (top-ventile concentration of risk). Separate models were developed for assaults against non-family and intra-family adults and minors. RESULTS: There were 4,640 male soldiers found to be perpetrators against non-family adults, 1,384 against non-family minors, 380 against intra-family adults, and 335 against intra-family minors. Top-ventile concentration of risk was 16.2%-20.2% predicting perpetration against non-family adults and minors and 34.2%-65.1% against intra-family adults and minors. Final predictors consisted largely of measures of prior crime involvement and the presence and treatment of mental disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative data can be used to develop actuarial models that identify a high proportion of sexual assault perpetrators. If a system is developed to consolidate administrative predictors routinely, then predictions could be generated periodically to identify those in need of preventive intervention. Whether this would be cost effective, though, would depend on intervention costs, effectiveness, and competing risks.
Authors: Eric B Elbogen; Sally C Johnson; H Ryan Wagner; Connor Sullivan; Casey T Taft; Jean C Beckham Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2014-02-27 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Robert J Ursano; Lisa J Colpe; Steven G Heeringa; Ronald C Kessler; Michael Schoenbaum; Murray B Stein Journal: Psychiatry Date: 2014 Impact factor: 2.458
Authors: Eric B Elbogen; Michelle Cueva; H Ryan Wagner; Shoba Sreenivasan; Mira Brancu; Jean C Beckham; Lynn Van Male Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Jennifer Villani; Sheri D Schully; Payam Meyer; Ranell L Myles; Jocelyn A Lee; David M Murray; Ashley J Vargas Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Robert J Ursano; Ronald C Kessler; James A Naifeh; Holly B Herberman Mash; Matthew K Nock; Pablo A Aliaga; Carol S Fullerton; Gary H Wynn; Tsz Hin H Ng; Hieu M Dinh; Nancy A Sampson; Tzu-Cheg Kao; Steven G Heeringa; Murray B Stein Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Kelly L Zuromski; Samantha L Bernecker; Carol Chu; Chelsey R Wilks; Peter M Gutierrez; Thomas E Joiner; Howard Liu; James A Naifeh; Matthew K Nock; Nancy A Sampson; Alan M Zaslavsky; Murray B Stein; Robert J Ursano; Ronald C Kessler Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-12-07 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Samantha L Bernecker; Anthony J Rosellini; Matthew K Nock; Wai Tat Chiu; Peter M Gutierrez; Irving Hwang; Thomas E Joiner; James A Naifeh; Nancy A Sampson; Alan M Zaslavsky; Murray B Stein; Robert J Ursano; Ronald C Kessler Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: James A Naifeh; Holly B Herberman Mash; Murray B Stein; Carol S Fullerton; Ronald C Kessler; Robert J Ursano Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 15.992