Hot spots policing and crime reduction: an update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis¶
Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V., & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: an update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Vulnerability Hotspot
- And the population arithmetic cuts against the hotspot as a general rule: hot spots policing does show a small, statistically significant mean effect favouring concentration, but the prevention paradox holds that only a minority of disease cases originates from a high-risk population, with the majority originating from low- and moderate-risk populations.
This sourceBraga, Anthony A., Brandon S. Turchan, Andrew V. Papachristos, and David M. Hureau. "Hot spots policing and crime reduction: an update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis." Journal of Experimental Criminology 15, no. 3 (2019): 289–311 — "a small statistically significant mean effect size favoring the effects of hot spots policing." Contradicts the general form: Mackenbach, Joreintje D., Josine M. Stuber, and Joline W. J. Beulens. "Evidence on the effectiveness and equity of population-based policies to reduce the burden of type 2 diabetes: a narrative review." Diabetologia 68, no. 2 (2025): 281–294 — "Geoffrey Rose's prevention paradox states that only a minority of disease cases originates from a high-risk population, with the majority originating from low-/moderate-risk populations."
- And the population arithmetic cuts against the hotspot as a general rule: hot spots policing does show a small, statistically significant mean effect favouring concentration, but the prevention paradox holds that only a minority of disease cases originates from a high-risk population, with the majority originating from low- and moderate-risk populations.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Recorded for the single citation of this work.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:34b5cb557efe · see in the full table