Sexual offender recidivism revisited: A meta-analysis of recent treatment studies (original) (raw)

1995, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

To assess the effectiveness of different treatments for different types of sexual offender. Searching PsycLIT, PsycBOOKs, and reference lists of previously published reviews of outcome data on treatment for male sexual offenders, were searched from 1988 onwards for published studies not included in a previous review by Furby et al. (see Other Publications of Related Interest). Other restrictions, such as publication language, were not stated. Study selection Study designs of evaluations included in the review Published studies with 10 or more participants, a comparison or control group, and reported recidivism data were included. Limited information was provided on study designs included. The length of treatment varied from 4.5 to 60 months (mean 18.54 months; standard deviation, SD, 20.304) and followup from 1 to 20 years (mean 6.85 years; SD 5.95). Specific interventions included in the review The treatment modalities included behavioural, cognitive-behavioural, family therapy, group psychotherapy, hormonal (anti-androgen drug or castration), interpersonal, institutional programmes, individual psychotherapy, no-treatment comparison and medroxyprogesterone acetate. Participants included in the review Male sexual offenders, usually persons arrested for sexually aggressive behaviour including adolescents and men over the age of 17 years. Offences committed against women and children included rape, sexual assault, paedophilia, sodomy, exhibitionism and voyeurism. Studies were undertaken in outpatients and institutionalised care. Included studies were characterised by significant levels of participant exclusion from the analysis. Of the 80.9% (5,552 of 6,865 participants) excluded, the majority were associated with one study as a result of the non-matching of participants in treatment groups; removing this study left 35.8% of participants (620 of 1,733) excluded from the analysis. Excluded participants tended to be the most pathological participants, e.g. have extensive offences history, psychotic behaviour, organic brain syndrome, denied offences, or management problem in prison, or withdrew from the treatment programme. Outcomes assessed in the review Recidivism, i.e. additional sexually aggressive behaviour after a treatment period for participants who did and did not receive treatment, that led to official legal charges. Supporting evidence was provided by self-reports, or informal reports from agencies. How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made? The author does not state how the papers were selected for the review, or how many of the reviewers performed the selection. Assessment of study quality The authors do not report the criteria used to assess validity, or how the validity assessment was performed. Data extraction The author does not state how the data were extracted for the review, or how many of the reviewers performed the data