Cited by 4Crime Patterns and InterventionsPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis

Assessing the feasibility and performance of risk assessment instruments for early intervention and prevention services in Juvenile Justice

Sheppard, Keller G., Talaugon, Alyssa R., Hernandez, Jorge L.·2024·Journal of Criminal Justice

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2024.102262

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sheppard, K. G., Talaugon, A. R., & Hernandez, J. L.
Affiliations
Florida State University (US)
Corresponding author
Sheppard, Keller G.
Venue
Journal of Criminal Justice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
94
Pages
102262
ISSN
0047-2352 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401756028
Cited by
4
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2
FWCI
2.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Criminal Justice (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Keywords
risk assessment tools, juvenile justice, prevention services, early intervention, recidivism prediction, justice-involved youth, predictive validity, machine learning, demographic bias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review