Quality and quality improvement in forensic mental health evaluations

Despite the growing attention to quality and quality improvement in health care in the United States, forensic psychiatry has yet to incorporate relevant developments and information and make quality an important item on the agenda. This article reviews the empirical research regarding the perceived quality of forensic evaluations, which has primarily examined criminal rather than civil forensic evaluations. Beyond the available research, many important policy and empirical questions must be addressed, including the definition of a quality forensic evaluation, the process used to access quality, the indicators and measures used, the methods that provide incentives for performing quality evaluations, the role of forensic psychiatry training programs, and the role of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL) or other professional organizations in the quality improvement enterprise. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 33:158–75, 2005 In 1996, Dietz1 encouraged forensic psychiatrists to aspire to excellence in their chosen field. He empha-sized the need to search for the truth, to be honest, to disclose biases and credentials to potential clients, and to accept cases with caution. He asked us t