Recidivism outcomes for young people who have committed a sexual offence and received treatment: A systematic narrative review of studies conducted in Australia and New Zealand

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary of previous systematic reviews and meta-analytical studies conducted between 2002 and 2018.

				Sample size			Sexual recidivism			Non-sexual recidivism
Study	Studies (k)	Follow-Up	Prominent treatment	TG (n)	CG (n)	Total	TG (%)	CG (%)	OR	TG (%)	CG (%)	OR
Hanson et al. (2002)^a	43	12m-16y (43m)	CBT	5078	4376	9454	12.3	16.8	0.81, 0.50^b	27.9	39.2	0.56
Kettrey and Lipsey (2018)	8	12-75m	Counselling, CBT	802	397	1199	0-12.7	3.7-75	0.74	18.9-53.8	16.5-75	0.58
Lösel and Schmucker (2005)^a	69	5y	CBT	–	–	22,181	12	24	1.70^c	22.4	32.5	1.67
Reitzel and Carbonell (2006)	9	58.5m	CBT, Multi-systemic	1301	1685	2986	7.37	18.93	0.43	–	–	–
Walker et al. (2004)	10	6y	CBT, Eclectic	644	–	644	–	–	0.37	–	–	–
Winokur et al. (2006)	11	6y	CBT	–	–		0–5	5–8	–	10–36	10–75	–

Notes. k = Number of observations. n = Number of participants. OR = mean odds ratio. tg = treatment group. CG = comparison group (dropouts and refusers). m = months. Y = YEARS. CBT = treatment that is cognitive-behavioural therapy.

^aThese reviews were predominately based on adults but did include some studies on young people.

^bOR for studies comprising young people.

^cWhere an OR value over one demonstrates treatment effectiveness.

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram, systematic screening of records.

Table 2. Summary of study, participant and treatment characteristics.

		Participant characteristics					Treatment characteristics
Study ID	Author (year)	Total	TG	CG	Mean Age	Sex	Primary Treatment	Approach	Location	Duration	Risk Level	Recidivism Source	Recidivism Definition	Follow-Up Period
1	Allan et al. (2003)	326	73	237	15.10^b	Male	Psychological Service^c	–	Community	–	–	Police, Courts	Conviction	4.2y
2	Allard et al. (2016)	104	104	-	16.01^a	Male	Multisystemic	Individual	Community	1.19y^d	–	Police	Charge	2.5y
3	Curnow et al. (1998)	138	-	-	16.0^a	Male	Multisystemic	Individual, group	Community	10.8m^e	–	Police, government agency	–	4.5y
4	Fortune (2007)	682	217	465	14^a	Male, Female	Multiple	Individual, group	Community	1.42y	Medium–High	Police, government agency	Charge, conviction	4.5y
5	Kingi and Robertson (2007)	41	17	24	12–16^a	Male	Cognitive–behavioural, culturally relevant	Individual, group	Residential	1.5–2.0y	High	Government agency	Charge, conviction	3.58y
6	Laing et al. (2014)	100	34	66	12–15^b	Male, Female	Multisystemic	Individual, group	Community	2.0y	–	Police	Charge	4.58y
7	Lambie et al. (2000)	14	14	-	15^a	Male	Adventure therapy, counselling	Individual, group	Community	1.5y	Medium–High	Government agency	–	2.0y
8	Molnar et al. (2021)	123	123	-	15.47^a	Male	Individualised services	Individual	Community	1.21y	High	Police	Arrest	4.0y

Notes. ^aAge at time of referral or commencing treatment. ^bAge at time of index sexual offence for which treatment was required. ^cThe authors note the treatment cohort attended a “psychological service”. y^d = Years. m^e = Months.

Table 3. Summary of descriptive data on post-treatment recidivism rates.

		Sexual recidivism				Violent recidivism				other recidivism
		Treatment		Comparison		Treatment		Comparison		Treatment		Comparison
Study ID	Sample (N)	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
1.	326	8	11.0	23	9.0	–	–	–	–	21^a	28.8	92^a	36.4
2.	104	3	2.9	–	–	23	22.1	–	–	61	58.7	–	–
3.	138	8	6.5	–	–	31	25.2	–	–	68	55.3	–	–
4.	682	1	2.9	6	9.1	3^b	8.8	21^b	31.8	–	–	–	–
5.	41	1	2.4	2	4.9	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
6.^c	100	–	0.7	–	3.6	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	32.0
7.	14	6	2.8	33	7.1	26	12.0	128	27.5	83	38.2	227	48.8
8.	123	0	0	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

Notes. ^aResults include sexual offences and other types of offending. ^bResults include sexual offences. ^cThe authors provide the percentage of reoffending but not the sample size in each group.

Table 4. Summary of descriptive data on recidivism rates for treatment completers, dropouts and refusers.

	Sexual recidivism			Violent recidivism			Other recidivism
	Treatment	Dropouts	Refusers	Treatment	Dropouts	Refusers	Treatment	Dropouts	Refusers
Study ID	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)
1.	8 (11.0)	–	23 (9.5)	–	–	–	21 (28.8)^a	–	92 (36.4)^a
2.	3 (2.9)	–	–	23 (22.1)	–	–	–	–	–
3.	8 (6.5)	–	–	31 (25.2)	–	–	–	–	–
4.	1 (2.9)	3 (18.8)	3 (6.0)	3 (8.8)^b	5 (31.3%)^b	16 (32.0)	–	–	–
5.	1 (2.4)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
6.	- (0.7)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
7.	6 (2.8)	16 (9.7)	17 (5.7)	26 (12.0)	51 (30.9)	77 (25.7)	83 (38.2)	103 (62.4)	124 (41.3)
8.	0 (0.0)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

Notes. ^aResults include sexual offences and other types of offending. ^bResults include sexual offences.

Table 5. Summary of descriptive data on recidivism by indigenous young people and non-Indigenous young people.

	Sexual recidivism		Violent recidivism		Other recidivism
	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous
Study ID	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)
1.^a	15 (15.8)	6 (5.0)	–	–	28 (23.5)^b	44 (46.3)^b
2.	1 (2.8)	2 (2.9)	12 (33.3)	11 (16.2)	29 (80.6)	32 (47.1)
3.	3 (9.4)	5 (5.5)	13 (40.6)	18 (19.8)	25 (78.1)	43 (47.3)

Notes. ^aResults provided for study [1] are overall recidivism of both the treatment and comparison groups. ^bResults include sexual offences and other types of offending.

Hanson, R. K., Gordon, A., Harris, A. J., Marques, J. K., Murphy, W., Quinsey, V. L., & Seto, M. C. (2002). First report of the collaborative outcome data project on the effectiveness of psychological treatment for sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320201400207

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Kettrey, H. H., & Lipsey, M. W. (2018). The effects of specialized treatment on the recidivism of juvenile sex offenders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14(3), 361–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-018-9329-3

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lösel, F., & Schmucker, M. (2005). The effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(1), 117–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-004-6466-7

 Google Scholar

Reitzel, L. R., & Carbonell, J. L. (2006). The effectiveness of sexual offender treatment for juveniles as measured by recidivism: A meta-analysis. Sexual Abuse, 18(4), 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320601800407

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Walker, D. F., McGovern, S. K., Poey, E. L., & Otis, K. E. (2004). Treatment effectiveness for male adolescent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis and review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 13(3-4), 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1300/J070v13n03_14

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Winokur, M., Rozen, D., Batchelder, K., & Valentine, D.. (2006). Juvenile sexual offender treatment: A systematic review of evidence-based research [unpublished report]. Fort Collins, CO: Social Work Research Center, Colorado State University.

 Google Scholar

*Allan, A., Allan, M. M., Marshall, P., & Kraszlan, K. (2003). Recidivism among male juvenile sexual offenders in Western Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 10(2), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1375/pplt.2003.10.2.359

 Google Scholar

*Allard, T., Rayment-McHugh, S., Adams, D., Smallbone, S., & McKillop, N. (2016). Responding to youth sexual offending: A field-based practice model that “closes the gap” on sexual recidivism among Indigenous and non-Indigenous males. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 22(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2014.1003107

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

*Curnow, R., Streker, P., & Williams, E. (1998). Juvenile justice evaluation report: Male adolescent program for positive sexuality. Victorian Government, Department of Human Services.

 Google Scholar

*Fortune, C.-A. G. (2007). Not just ‘old men in raincoats’: Effectiveness of specialised community treatment programmes for sexually abusive children and youth in New Zealand.

 Google Scholar

*Kingi, V. M., & Robertson, J. P. (2007). Evaluation of the Te Poutama Ārahi Rangatahi residential treatment programme for adolescent males. Child, Youth and Family Wellington.

 Google Scholar

*Laing, L., Tolliday, D., Kelk, N., & Law, B. (2014). Recidivism following community based treatment for non-adjudicated young people with sexually abusive behaviors. Sexual Abuse in Australia and New Zealand, 6, 38–47.

 Google Scholar

*Lambie, I., Hickling, L., Seymour, F., Simmonds, L., Robson, M., & Houlahan, C. (2000). Using wilderness therapy in treating adolescent sexual offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 5(2), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600008413302

 Google Scholar

*Molnar, T., McKillop, N., Allard, T., Rynne, J., & Adams, D. (2021). Patterns of rearrest for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous youth who have sexually harmed. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 27(2), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2020.1850894

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar