Firearm injuries: Epidemic then, endemic now

Children's Memorial Research Center and the Department of Pediatrics, Fein-berg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Ill, USA.
American Journal of Public Health (Impact Factor: 4.23). 05/2007; 97(4):626-9. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.085340
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There has been a transition in US firearm injuries from an epidemic phase (mid-1980s to early 1990s) to an endemic one (since the mid-1990s). Endemic US firearm injuries merit public health attention because they exact an ongoing toll, may give rise to new epidemic outbreaks, and can foster firearm injuries in other parts of the world. The endemic period is a good time for the development of ongoing prevention approaches, including assessment and monitoring of local risk factors over time and application of proven measures to reduce these risk factors, development of means to address changing circumstances, and ongoing professional and public education designed to weave firearm injury prevention into the fabric of public health work and everyday life.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Available free until 22nd Jan 2015 from: The paper provides a review of some of the thoughts, ideas, and opinions that pervade the public health literature concerning how to classify or conceptualise violence. It is argued that violence transcends classic distinctions between communicable and non-communicable diseases, distinguishes itself from the discipline of injury control, and is influenced by wider, social determinants. Through a discussion of these varied perspectives it is concluded that a fourth revolution in public health is needed – a ‘change in scope’ revolution – that recognizes the influence of social justice, economics, and globalization in the aetiology of premature death and ill health, into which violence fits. However, rather than be shackled by debates of definition or classification, it is important that public health acknowledges the role it can play in preventing violence through policy and practice, and takes unified action.
    Public Health 11/2014; 128(11):960-967. DOI:10.1016/j.puhe.2014.09.010 · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Firearm mortality is the leading cause of death for young African American males, however, few studies have focused on racial/ethnic minority populations and firearm violence. The National Black Caucus of State Legislators advocates for legislation that promotes the health of African Americans. Thus, the purpose of this study was to collect baseline data on African American legislators' perceptions regarding firearm violence in the African American community. A cross-sectional study of African American legislators (n = 612) was conducted to investigate the research questions. Of the 612 questionnaires mailed, 12 were not deliverable, and 170 were returned (28 %). Utilizing a three wave mailing process, African American legislators were invited to participate in the study. The majority (88 %) of respondents perceived firearm violence to be very serious among African Americans. Few (10 %) legislators perceived that addressing legislative issues would be an effective strategy in reducing firearm violence among African Americans. The majority (72 %) of legislators perceived the most effective strategy to reducing firearm violence in the African American community should focus on addressing societal issues (e.g. crime and poverty). After adjusting for the number of perceived barriers, the number of perceived benefits was a significant predictor of legislators' perceived effectiveness of firearm violence prevention legislation for 8 of the 24 potential firearm violence prevention legislative bills.
    Journal of Community Health 10/2014; 40(3). DOI:10.1007/s10900-014-9954-3 · 1.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To document overall, racial, ethnic and intent-specific spatiotemporal trends of firearm-related fatality rates (FRF rates) in the USA.
    BMJ Open 09/2014; 4(9):e005628. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005628 · 2.06 Impact Factor


Available from