La exploración de las categorizaciones de la tipología de los varones violentos en la pareja: un estudio metodológico

Intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators were categorized based on whether they were generally violent (GV) or family only violent (FO) using self-report or arrest records. Classification criteria to assess recidivism in perpetrators of IPV were evaluated herein to determine the incremental validity of using a perpetrator’s criminal history in addition to their self-report information for categorization purposes. The concordance rates for categorizing subtypes of male perpetrators were compared for two methods, namely, self-report versus criminal history data. Categorizations were made based on self-reported history of violence and federal criminal records separately. Between measures consistency was defined as whether or not the self-report categorizations matched federal criminal record categorizations. It was hypothesized that self-report would not be sufficient as the sole method of categorizing male perpetrators, and the use of criminal history data would add to the validity of the categorization system. Self-reports of aggression were higher than criminal records of aggression. Using data sources together may yield the best outcomes for offenders and society. Implications are discussed.Se clasificaron los varones que ejercen violencia en las relaciones de pareja (VP) en función de si eran violentos en general (VG) o solo en el entorno familiar (VF), empleando registros de autoinformes o de arrestos. Se analizaron los criterios de clasificación para evaluar la reincidencia de los infractores de VP con el fin de determinar la validez incremental del uso de los antecedentes penales del infractor, además de la información procedente de su autoinforme para la clasificación. Se compararon los índices de concordancia para categorizar los subtipos de infractores masculinos para dos métodos: los datos procedentes de autoinforme y los de antecedentes penales. La categorización se basó en la historia de violencia autoinformada y en los antecedentes penales por separado. La congruencia entre medidas se definió como la coincidencia o discrepancia de la categorización de autoinforme con la categorización de antecedentes penales. Se planteó la hipótesis de que el autoinforme no bastaba como único método para clasificar a los infractores masculinos y que el uso de datos procedentes de antecedentes penales aumentaba la validez del sistema de categorización. Hubo más autoinformes sobre agresión que antecedentes penales de agresión. El uso conjunto de ambos podría tener mejores resultados, tanto para los delincuentes como para la sociedad. Se discuten las implicaciones de estos resultados.S

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

Subtypes of batterers in treatment: empirical support for a distinction between type I, type II and type III.

This study explores the existence of different types of batterers in a sample of 266 men who had been court referred for intimate partner violence. The data collected in the assessment that have been used to perform a hierarchical and a two-step cluster analysis fall into three areas: aggression towards the partner, general aggression and presence of psychopathology and personality traits, more specifically, alcohol use, borderline and antisocial personality traits, psychopathy traits, state anger and trait anger, anger expression and control, anger, hostility, and, finally, impulsivity. The results show a typology consisting of 3 types of batterers on the basis of violence level and psychopathology: low (65%), moderate (27.8%) and high (7.1%). This study provides empirical support for the development of batterer typologies. These typologies will help achieve early detection of different types of batterers, allowing us to tailor interventions on the basis of the needs of each of the types

Differences between the three types of batterers in variables related to generality of violence and presence of psychopathology.

<p>Note. The data refer to the mean ± standard deviation (<i>SD</i>).</p><p>*<i>p</i><0.05 **<i>p</i><0.01 ***<i>p</i><.001.</p><p>High, moderate and low level of violence and psychopathology</p><p>Differences between the three types of batterers in variables related to generality of violence and presence of psychopathology.</p

Comparison between batterers’ profiles obtained in this study and Cavanaugh and Gelles [11] proposal.

<p>Comparison between batterers’ profiles obtained in this study and Cavanaugh and Gelles <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0110651#pone.0110651-Cavanaugh1" target="_blank">[11]</a> proposal.</p

Validation of the typology found: differences between the three types of batterers in number of prior arrests, family and social variables and psychoactive substance consumption.

<p>Note. The data refer to the mean ± standard deviation (<i>SD</i>).</p><p>*<i>p</i><0.05 **<i>p</i><0.01 ***<i>p</i><.001.</p><p>High, moderate and low level of violence and psychopathology</p><p>Validation of the typology found: differences between the three types of batterers in number of prior arrests, family and social variables and psychoactive substance consumption.</p

Differences between the three types of batterers regarding the frequency of violence towards the partner.

<p>Note. Data refer to the average of episodes in the last year of cohabitation with the partner ± standard deviation (<i>SD</i>).</p><p>*<i>p</i><0.05 **<i>p</i><0.01 ***<i>p</i><.001.</p><p>High, moderate and low level of violence and psychopathology</p><p>Differences between the three types of batterers regarding the frequency of violence towards the partner.</p