Back

Improving risk assessment in forensic mental health: temporal validation and clinical refinement of the FoVOx risk tool

Sivak, L.; Forsman, J.; Sariaslan, A.; Tiihonen, J.; Fazel, S.

2026-01-22 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.01.20.26344471 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundForensic psychiatric services are expanding in many countries, and discharging patients from secure hospitals relies on accurate estimates of risk of adverse outcomes. Novel evidence-based tools for estimating one key risk, violent reoffending, have been developed in recent years. We aimed to externally validate one new tool, FoVOx, in forensic psychiatric patients sentenced to treatment, and to develop an updated model (FoVOx2), incorporating additional clinical predictors. MethodsUsing Swedish national registers, we conducted a temporal external validation of FoVOx by examining 767 patients discharged between 2014 and 2023. For the FoVOx2 cohort, 906 patients discharged between 2008 and 2023 were followed up, and additional predictors tested. The outcome was violent reconviction within 12 or 24 months. Model performance was evaluated using Harrells C-index, time-dependent AUCs, calibration, and classification metrics at predefined thresholds. ResultsIn temporal validation, FoVOx showed moderate discrimination (AUCs 0.69 and 0.71; C-index = 0.69) and acceptable overall accuracy (Brier <0.11). Calibration was generally good, with mild overestimation at the highest predicted risks (>20%) at 12 months and slight underprediction at 24 months. The updated FoVOx2 model newly incorporated clozapine treatment and additional diagnostic categories. It was associated with improved performance (AUCs 0.77; optimism-corrected C-index = 0.72; Brier 0.06 and 0.09) and achieved good calibration (intercept {approx} 0; slopes 1.03 and 1.05). ConclusionsUpdating risk assessment tools with additional clinical factors can lead to incremental improvement in model performance. Implementing tools should consider clinical utility and impact as next steps.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
2
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
3
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.0%
4
European Psychiatry
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
5
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
6
Schizophrenia Bulletin
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
7
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 40%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
9
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.5%
10
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.5%
12
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
13
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.3%
14
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.3%
15
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Neuropsychopharmacology
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
18
JAMA Psychiatry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.6%
19
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
20
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
21
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
37 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
22
Molecular Psychiatry
242 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
23
Journal of Psychiatric Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
24
American Journal of Psychiatry
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
25
American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
62 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
29
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 75%
0.7%
30
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%