Dataset Information

Longitudinal pathway from violence exposure to firearm carriage among adolescents: The role of future expectation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Exposure to violence is a risk factor for firearm carriage. Youth exposed to violence also have difficulty envisioning positive future outcomes (e.g., educational outcomes), which can increase the likelihood of firearm carriage over time. Researchers, however, have not yet examined whether changes in exposure to violence over time can influence the developmental trajectories of firearm carriage. To address this gap, we (1) examined the longitudinal association between exposure to violence and firearm carriage (grades 9 to 12) and then (2) examined whether changes in future expectations mediated this longitudinal association.

Method

The longitudinal association between exposure to violence and firearm carriage through future expectations was examined among 850 adolescents from the Flint Adolescent Study. Participants were recruited from four high schools in a midwestern city in the United States. Parallel latent growth models and latent growth mediation models were estimated.

Results

A positive association was observed between the rate of change in exposure to violence and firearm carriage. Exposure to violence also indirectly increased the risk for firearm carriage over time by decreasing future expectation in the 9th grade.

Conclusions

Our results support the idea that helping youth develop positive attitude about educational success may help reduce firearm carriage. Increasing positive expectations about future may help prevent firearm carriage within the context of violence exposure.

SUBMITTER: Lee DB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7325611 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInterpersonal firearm violence among youth is a substantial public health problem, and emergency department (ED) physicians require a clinical screening tool to identify high-risk youth.ObjectiveTo derive a clinically feasible risk index for firearm violence.Design24-month prospective cohort study.SettingUrban, level 1 ED.ParticipantsSubstance-using youths, aged 14 to 24 years, seeking ED care for an assault-related injury and a proportionately sampled group of non-assault-injured youth enrolled from September 2009 through December 2011.MeasurementsFirearm violence (victimization/perpetration) and validated questionnaire items.ResultsA total of 599 youths were enrolled, and presence/absence of future firearm violence during follow-up could be ascertained in 483 (52.2% were positive). The sample was randomly split into training (75%) and post-score-construction validation (25%) sets. Using elastic-net penalized logistic regression, 118 baseline predictors were jointly analyzed; the most predictive variables fell predominantly into 4 domains: violence victimization, community exposure, peer influences, and fighting. By selection of 1 item from each domain, the 10-point SaFETy (Serious fighting, Friend weapon carrying, community Environment, and firearm Threats) score was derived. SaFETy was associated with firearm violence in the validation set (odds ratio [OR], 1.47 [95% CI, 1.23 to 1.79]); this association remained (OR, 1.44 [CI, 1.20 to 1.76]) after adjustment for reason for ED visit. In 5 risk strata observed in the training data, firearm violence rates in the validation set were 18.2% (2 of 11), 40.0% (18 of 45), 55.8% (24 of 43), 81.3% (13 of 16), and 100.0% (6 of 6), respectively.LimitationsThe study was conducted in a single ED and involved substance-using youths. SaFETy was not externally validated.ConclusionThe SaFETy score is a 4-item score based on clinically feasible questionnaire items and is associated with firearm violence. Although broader validation is required, SaFETy shows potential to guide resource allocation for prevention of firearm violence.Primary funding sourceNational Institute on Drug Abuse R01024646.

Project description:ImportanceCalifornia's gun violence restraining order (GVRO) law, implemented beginning in 2016, allows for people at high risk of harming themselves or others with a firearm to be temporarily disarmed and prevented from purchasing firearms for 3 weeks to 1 year; many states have recently enacted similar laws. The research to date is on older and more limited risk-warrant laws.ObjectiveTo determine whether implementation of the California GVRO law was associated with decreased rates of firearm assault or firearm self-harm in a large metropolitan county between 2016 and 2019.Design, setting, and participantsThis serial cross-sectional study including data from 28 counties used the synthetic control method to evaluate differences in firearm violence between San Diego County and its synthetic control following implementation of the California law from 2016 to 2019. San Diego County was used as the treated unit because it issued substantially more GVROs than any other county in California during the study period. A total of 27 California counties that issued no or very few gun violence restraining orders from 2016 to 2019 and that had stable rates of firearm violence between 2005 and 2015 were included in the control pool. Data were analyzed from February 2021 to July 2021.ExposuresImplementation of the statewide GVRO law in 2016 in San Diego County.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual rates of fatal and nonfatal firearm assault injuries and firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 people.ResultsIn the study period, there were 355 GVROs in San Diego county, and a median (IQR) total of 8 (3-20) GVROs per donor county. The mean difference between the observed rate in San Diego County and the estimated rate in the synthetic San Diego County, 2016-2019, was -0.74 firearm assaults per 100 000 (-13% difference) and 0.13 firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 (3% difference). Results from in-space placebo tests suggested that these differences cannot be distinguished from variation due to chance (pseudo-P values from a 1-sided test: P for assault = .35, P for self-harm = .67).Conclusions and relevanceTo our knowledge, this study was the first to analyze the association between GVRO implementation and firearm violence in California and the first to evaluate the association between risk-based firearm removal laws and firearm assault in any state. GVROs were not associated with reduced population-level rates of firearm violence in San Diego County, but this may change as the number of orders increases over time; the association between GVROs and firearm violence at the individual level cannot be inferred from our findings and should be the subject of future studies.

Project description:BackgroundFirearm violence is a significant public health problem in the United States. A surge in firearm purchasing following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to an increase in firearm violence. We sought to estimate the state-level association between firearm purchasing and interpersonal firearm violence during the pandemic.MethodsCross-sectional study of the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia from January 2018 through July 2020. Data were obtained from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (a proxy for firearm purchasing) and the Gun Violence Archive. Using negative binomial regression models, we estimated the association between cumulative excess firearm purchases in March through July 2020 (measured as the difference between observed rates and those expected from autoregressive integrated moving average models) and injuries (including nonfatal and fatal) from intentional, interpersonal firearm violence (non-domestic and domestic violence).ResultsWe estimated that there were 4.3 million excess firearm purchases nationally from March through July 2020 and a total of 4075 more firearm injuries than expected from April through July. We found no relationship between state-level excess purchasing and non-domestic firearm violence, e.g., each excess purchase per 100 population was associated with a rate ratio (RR) of firearm injury from non-domestic violence of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.50-1.02) in April; 0.99 (95% CI: 0.72-1.25) in May; 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93-1.32) in June; and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.85-1.12) in July. Excess firearm purchasing within states was associated with an increase in firearm injuries from domestic violence in April (RR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.32-5.93) and May (RR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.19-2.91), though estimates were sensitive to model specification.ConclusionsNationwide, firearm purchasing and firearm violence increased substantially during the first months of the coronavirus pandemic. At the state level, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing was not associated with the magnitude of the increase in firearm violence. Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May. Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributable to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.

Project description:IntroductionFirearm-related deaths and injuries are ongoing public health issues in the United States. We reviewed a series of gun violence- and firearm-related injuries treated at a multi-campus community healthcare system in West Michigan to better understand the demographic and clinical characteristics of these injuries. We also studied hospital charges, and payers responsible, in an effort to identify stakeholders and opportunities for community- and hospital-based prevention.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of firearm injuries treated at Mercy Health Muskegon (MHM) between May 1, 2015 and June 30, 2019. Demographic data, injury type, Injury Severity Score (ISS), anatomic location and organ systems involved, length of stay (LOS), mortality, time of year, and ZIP code in which the injury occurred were reviewed, as were hospital charges and payers responsible.ResultsOf those reviewed, 307 firearm-related injuries met inclusion criteria for the study. In 69.4% of cases the injury type was attempted murder or intent to do bodily harm. Accidental and self-inflicted injuries accounted for 25% of cases. There was a statistically significant difference in the mechanism of injury between Black and White patients with a higher proportion of Black men injured due to gun violence (P < 0.001). Median ISS was 8 and the most commonly injured organ system was musculoskeletal. Median LOS was one day. Self-inflicted firearm injuries had the highest rate of mortality (50%) followed by attempted murder (7%) and accidental discharge (3.1%; P < 0.001). Median hospital charge was $8,008. In 68% of cases, Medicaid was the payer. MHM received $4.98 million dollars in reimbursement from Medicaid; however, when direct and indirect costs were taken into account, a loss of $12,648 was observed.ConclusionFindings from this study reveal that young, Black men are the primary victims of gun violence-related injuries in our West Michigan service area. Hospital care of firearm-related injuries at MHM was predominantly paid for by Medicaid. Multiple stakeholders stand to benefit from funding and supporting community- and hospital-based prevention programs designed to reduce gun violence and firearm-related injuries in our service area.