Too many or too few unintentional firearm deaths in official US mortality data?

被引:46
|
作者
Barber, Catherine [1 ]
Hemenway, David [1 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Harvard Injury Control Res Ctr, Boston, MA 02115 USA
来源
ACCIDENT ANALYSIS AND PREVENTION | 2011年 / 43卷 / 03期
关键词
Injury surveillance; Firearm accident; National Vital Statistics System; National Violent Death Reporting System; Nosology; REPORTING SYSTEM; GUN; PREVENTION; HOMICIDE; INJURY; LAWS;
D O I
10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.018
中图分类号
TB18 [人体工程学];
学科分类号
1201 ;
摘要
We examined the accuracy of data on unintentional firearm fatalities in the United States. We began with data from the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) and examined every firearm death reported as an accident by any NVDRS data source - the NVDRS abstracter, the State Vital Statistics Registry (i.e., the ICD-10 Underlying Cause of Death code and manner of death from the death certificate), the medical examiner or coroner report, and the police Supplementary Homicide Report. After carefully reading the information from all sources, we then classified each case as either unintentional or intentional using NVDRS definitions. Comparing our classification with that of the NVDRS abstracter, we conclude that NVDRS data accurately report unintentional firearm deaths (sensitivity 98%; positive predictive value [PPV] 99%). We then compared our classification with that of the State Vital Statistics Registry based on the ICD-10 Underlying Cause of Death code and found great inaccuracy (sensitivity 62%; PPV 58%). Thirty-eight percent of true cases were missed and 42% of reported cases were false positives. As has been previously reported in the literature, over half of unintentional shootings that were inflicted by another person were classified as homicides, not accidents. This is a particular problem for the data on young victims. What was unexpected, however, was the opposite problem: we found many unambiguous suicides and homicides that were reported as accidents. We believe this is due to the ICD-10 coding practice of assigning injury deaths to the "accident" category when manner of death is "pending" or left blank. Finally, at the state-level, we compared our overall results for each state and year with the official National Vital Statistics System count (reported on CDC's WONDER website). We found evidence of even greater over-reporting of unintentional firearm deaths there. In answer to the question, "Are there too many or too few unintentional firearm deaths in official mortality data?" the best answer is, "Both." Many true accidents are missed, while many suicides and homicides are mistakenly reported as accidents. By contrast, the NVDRS applies a case definition for unintentional firearm deaths with consistency and accuracy. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:724 / 731
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] TOO MANY OR TOO FEW
    不详
    RHODE ISLAND MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1978, 61 (06): : 255 - 255
  • [2] TOO MANY OR TOO FEW
    NORTHUP, GW
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC ASSOCIATION, 1979, 78 (11): : 777 - 778
  • [3] Too few or too many?
    Morris, C
    Payne, S
    Donnelly, P
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2002, 12 (04): : 83 - 83
  • [4] TOO MANY OR TOO FEW
    不详
    LANCET, 1946, 250 (JAN12): : 59 - 60
  • [5] TOO MANY OR TOO FEW
    NORTHUP, GW
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC ASSOCIATION, 1981, 80 (06): : 387 - 388
  • [6] THERE ARE TOO MANY STANDARDS, AND THERE ARE TOO FEW
    MEEK, BL
    COMPUTER STANDARDS & INTERFACES, 1993, 15 (01) : 35 - 41
  • [7] Too Few Physicians, or Too Many?
    Latham, Stephen R.
    HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2010, 40 (01) : 11 - 12
  • [8] Neurosurgeons - Too many or too few?
    Poza, M
    NEUROCIRUGIA, 2000, 11 (05): : 392 - +
  • [9] TOO MANY DOCTORS - OR TOO FEW
    STEVENSON, D
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1984, 289 (6451): : 1070 - 1070
  • [10] TOO MANY DOCTORS - OR TOO FEW
    HANGARTNER, JRW
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1984, 289 (6455): : 1384 - 1384