Abstract Purpose We conducted a multi-site, quasi-experimental investigation of the effects of pretrial risk assessments on pretrial release decisions and misconduct outcomes relative to practice as usual. Methods Using a multiple non-equivalent comparison group design, we matched 2631 pretrial defendants who received a risk assessment during a 1-year pilot period to two comparison groups of defendants who did not receive a risk assessment and were processed in the same year (n = 1580) or in the year prior to the pilot period (n = 3185). Weighted multilevel regression analyses were conducted separately for each comparison to examine effects of the pilot risk assessment condition on pretrial release and pretrial misconduct outcomes. Results Relative to comparison groups, defendants with risk assessments were more likely to receive non-financial release. When risk assessment-guided decisions adhered to structured guidelines, defendants with risk assessments had higher rates of pretrial release and spent less time in pretrial detention. Risk assessments were associated with slightly higher rates of non-violent and new re-arrests, but not failure to appear, relative to comparison conditions. Conclusions Pretrial risk assessments can facilitate non-financial release, though with a potentially higher rate of pretrial re-arrest. Structured guidelines may help maximize pretrial release while minimizing misconduct.

中文翻译：

---

与往常做法相关的审前风险评估对释放决定和不当行为结果的影响

摘要目的我们对审前风险评估对审前释放决定和与往常实践相关的不当行为结果的影响进行了多站点准实验调查。方法采用多重非对等对照组设计，将1年试点期间接受风险评估的2631名审前被告人与未接受风险评估并在同一年接受处理的两个对照组被告人（n = 1580) 或在试点期之前的一年 (n = 3185)。对每个比较分别进行加权多级回归分析，以检查试点风险评估条件对审前释放和审前不当行为结果的影响。结果相对于对照组，有风险评估的被告更有可能获得非财务释放。当风险评估指导的决定遵循结构化指导方针时，进行风险评估的被告有更高的审前释放率和更少的审前拘留时间。相对于比较条件，风险评估与非暴力和新的再次逮捕率略高有关，但并非没有出现。结论 审前风险评估可以促进非财务释放，但审前再次逮捕的可能性可能更高。结构化指南可能有助于最大限度地提高审前释放，同时最大限度地减少不当行为。相对于比较条件，风险评估与非暴力和新的再次逮捕率略高有关，但并非没有出现。结论 审前风险评估可以促进非财务释放，但审前再次逮捕的可能性可能更高。结构化指南可能有助于最大限度地提高审前释放，同时最大限度地减少不当行为。相对于比较条件，风险评估与非暴力和新的再次逮捕率略高有关，但并非没有出现。结论 审前风险评估可以促进非财务释放，但审前再次逮捕的可能性可能更高。结构化指南可能有助于最大限度地提高审前释放，同时最大限度地减少不当行为。