According to the Dangerous Prisoners Sexual Offenders Act 2003 (DPSOA), an offender is considered ‘dangerous’ if there is an ‘unacceptable risk’ that he will commit ‘serious sexual harm’. Current legislation operates within an actuarial justice framework, whereby increasing resources are spent on those considered at greater risk. There is limited research on the efficacy of this approach. The current study examines sexual recidivism rates of a sample of DPSOA offenders. Court files of 104 community-supervised dangerous sex offenders (M_age = 50.7 SD = 10.8) were examined to determine date and type of re-offending. Recidivism was operationalised as time until arrest (for a sexual conviction/contravention). The overall level of sexual recidivism was low (7.69%). Kaplan–Meier analyses of survival curves identified no difference in rates between risk categories. While this likely suggests that they are not dangerous or an unacceptable risk, the strict conditions of supervision may be effective in preventing sexual re-offending. Further, limitations in empirically understanding the construct need to be considered.

根据《2003 年危险囚犯性犯罪者法案》(DPSOA)，如果犯罪者存在实施“严重性伤害”的“不可接受的风险”，则该犯罪者被视为“危险”。目前的立法是在精算正义框架内运作的，越来越多的资源被用于那些被认为面临更大风险的人。关于这种方法的功效的研究有限。目前的研究调查了 DPSOA 罪犯样本的性累犯率。检查了 104 名社区监管的危险性犯罪者（ M_年龄= 50.7 SD = 10.8）的法庭档案，以确定再次犯罪的日期和类型。累犯被视为逮捕前的时间（因性犯罪/性犯罪）。性累犯总体水平较低（7.69%）。 Kaplan-Meier 对生存曲线的分析表明，风险类别之间的比率没有差异。虽然这可能表明它们并不危险或不可接受的风险，但严格的监管条件可能有效防止性犯罪再次犯罪。此外，需要考虑凭经验理解该构造的局限性。