{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03008849557522124, 'fraction_numerical': 0.033628318584070796, 'mean_word_length': 5.146739130434782, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Predictive validity of the HCR-20V3 in a sample of Australian forensic psychiatric patients

The Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 Version 3 is the latest iteration in the HCR-20 series, adopting novel changes such as the addition of Relevance ratings and non-requirement to include the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised. This study aimed to examine these changes and compare the predictive validity of the HCR-20V3 to the HCR-20V2. The sample comprised of 100 forensic psychiatric patients, retrospectively followed up for a maximum period of approximately 13 years post-discharge from the Thomas Embling Hospital. Recidivism data were sourced from official police records. Results indicated good to excellent inter-rater reliability. The HCR-20V3 significantly predicted violent recidivism (area under the curve = .70 to .77), levels of accuracy that were not significantly different from the HCR-20V2. HCR-20V3 Relevance ratings failed to add incremental validity above Presence ratings; however, the PCL–R improved upon the HCR-20V3’s validity. The study represented one of the first evaluations of the HCR-20V3 in Australia.