Validez predictiva del instrumento de evaluación de riesgos y recursos para la intervención FER-R, en adolescentes chilenos infractores de ley

Abstract

Se estudió la validez predictiva del instrumento Ficha de Evaluación de Riesgos y Recursos (FER-R) para adolescentes infractores de ley, en un lapso de dos años (2009-2011). La FER-R consta de 60 ítems y permite el registro de 10 dominios, riesgos criminogénicos, recursos y el registro de un índice de escalada delictiva. La muestra estuvo conformada por 101 adolescentes varones, entre 14 y 19 años de edad, judicializados y derivados a programas de intervención en medio libre. Los principales resultados muestran que el índice general de riesgo medido por la FER-R, presenta un 68.3 % de aciertos, con un área bajo la curva ROC = 0.73, indicando una magnitud predictiva fuerte de la escala total para predecir reincidencia en los adolescentes infractores chilenos.

Examining the Factor Structure of a Risk Assessment Inventory in Young Offenders: FER-R, Risk and Resource Assessment Form

“…Risk and Resource Assessment Form , FER-R , the acronym in Spanish for “ Ficha de Evaluación de Riesgos y Recursos ”, is an inventory of structured professional judgment that measures criminogenic risks, static and dynamic, along with adaptation resources in young offenders. It was developed in Chile by Paula Alarcón [ 27 ] and has previously published evidence of predictive reliability and validity [ 28 ]. It consists of 57 items, 39 that measure criminogenic risks (0–39 points), and 18 that measure adaptation resources (0–18 points).…”

“…In the risks domain, the scores are standardized as low, moderate, and high in each facet, creating a risk profile that can identify the criminogenic needs of greatest urgency for the intervention (see Figure 1 ); and the total risk index that varies between 0 and 39 is estimated with cut-off points categorized as low-risk, <11, moderate-risk, 12–17, and high-risk >18, values derived from a two-year follow-up study [ 28 ].…”

“…The first factor (interventions) assesses static risk (non-modifiable), the next five (education, peers, family, drugs, and attitudes) assess dynamic risks, susceptible to change; and the last two (protective resources and youth’s interests) assess personal and contextual adaptative resources that act as protective factors. The FER-R has a 24-month follow-up study of 100 adolescents [ 28 ], which shows overall predictive validity in 68.3% of cases and the effect size for predicting recidivism is robust (AUC = 0.73), with a 95% confidence interval (0.63–0.83). It also has an inter-rater reliability study [ 29 ] by Intra-class Correlation Coefficient analysis, obtaining a CCI value = 0.858 and reliability by internal consistency with satisfactory indices for risks (alpha 0.70–0.98) and for resources (alpha 0.80–0.94).…”

Empirical Determination of Transitory and Persistent Delinquency in Chilean Youth: Validation of the Criminal Engagement Severity Scale “EGED”

“…The use of criminogenic risk assessment instruments has become widespread in many correctional institutions around the world [25,26], although only a few are adapted or created specifically to evaluate Latin American adolescent offenders [27][28][29][30]. The evidence indicates that risk assessments using structured methods and instruments result in more precise estimations than unstructured ones [2,31].…”

Evaluación de características de personalidad psicopática en adolescentes según complejidades delictuales

“…Investigaciones desarrolladas en Chile han aportado a caracterizar a la población infractora de ley juvenil (Alarcón, et al, 2018;Alarcón et al, 2017;Pérez-Luco et al, 2012;Alarcón et al, 2012;Pérez-Luco, Alarcón et al, 2014;Vinet et al, 2011;Alarcón et al, 2009;Alarcón et al, 2005) y, por otra parte, desarrollado el Modelo Multidimensional de Intervención Diferenciada con Adolescentes (MMIDA; que permite comprender el inicio y mantenimiento de los jóvenes en el delito, diferenciarlos por trayectorias delictivas, distinguiendo factores de riesgo y protección para luego tomar decisiones de cara a la intervención. La riqueza de este modelo radica en que se basa en las evidencias y experiencias internacionales y nacionales, siendo en coherencia con el espíritu de la Ley 20.084 (2005), que requiere de una justicia especializada para adolescentes y los derechos del niño (Pérez-Luco et al, 2012).…”