Gender Matters: A Systematic Review of Risk-Needs Assessments for System-Impacted Women

Objective: This systematic review focused on the predictive validity of gender-responsive and gender-neutral risk assessment instruments for women involved in the criminal justice system by assessing intimate partner violence (IPV), violent recidivism, and general recidivism assessed. Method: Researchers looked for studies published between 1995 and 2024 using PubMed, PsychINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were met by fifty-seven studies, which represented forty-two distinct risk tools. Data such as study characteristics, outcome definitions, and predictive validity metrics were extracted from the final studies. Additionally, researchers evaluated inter-rater reliability for data coding, which was high. Results: With few gender differences, gender-neutral instruments like the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) and HCR-20 typically showed strong predictive validity for both violent and general recidivism. A gender-responsive supplement called the Female Additional Manual (FAM) demonstrated no incremental validity and poor discrimination. The Women’s Risk/Need Assessment (WRNA), on the other hand, included risk and protective factors unique to women and demonstrated strong predictive validity. The variable predictive validity of IPV-focused instruments underscores the significance of taking gender-inverted and bidirectional IPV into account. Conclusions: Gender-responsive tools, such as the WRNA, may enhance assessment by capturing women-specific risk and protective factors, but current male-normed tools function well for women. Future studies should assess utility for IPV risk and look at performance across racial and ethnic groups. When integrating risk tools, clinicians should take contact, protective factors and intervention potential into account.