Reviewing the Literature on the Impact of Gun Violence on Early Childhood Development.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To examine the impacts of gun violence on early childhood development including early childhood mental health, cognitive development, and the assessment and treatment of survivors. RECENT FINDINGS: The literature reflects that gun violence exposure is often associated with significant mental health outcomes including anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and depression in older youth. Historically, studies have focused on adolescents and their exposures to gun violence through proximity to gun violence within their communities, neighborhoods, and schools. However, the impacts of gun violence on young children are less known. Gun violence has significant impacts on mental health outcomes of youth aged 0-18. Few studies focus specifically on how gun violence impacts early childhood development. In light of the increase in youth gun violence over the past three decades with a significant uptick since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, continued efforts are needed to better understand how gun violence impacts early childhood development.

Ten Years After Oak Creek: Federal Policy Recommendations to Protect Communities Targeted by Hate

2022 was a year marked with significant anniversaries of hate against the AAPI community both historic and recent, from the 40th anniversary of the hate-driven murder of Chinese American immigrant Vincent Chin to the one-year anniversary of recent mass shootings in Atlanta and Indianapolis. These commemorations, moreover, came amidst a series of hate crimes targeting Sikh men in Richmond Hill, Queens, and a years-long spike in violence against Asian Americans - particularly Asian American women - ignited by the COVID-19 pandemic. One anniversary in 2022, however, is both important on its own right as a marker in the history of targeted violence and useful for contextualizing recent trends of hate in the US: the 10-year remembrance of the shooting at a gurdwara, a Sikh house of worship, in Oak Creek WI.

Changes in adult trauma at a level 1 trauma center before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Prior research has shown the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with changes in ED volumes, trauma caseloads and distribution of disease. Objectives: We aim to characterize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic at a diverse, high-volume Level 1 trauma center in the US. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of our institutional trauma registry at our center from 2018 through 2021 to study changes before and after COVID-19. We established March 14 - December 31 as the study period of interest for each year. We analyzed the data with descriptive statistics and created Poisson regression models to determine the estimated percentage year-to-year changes. Results: Total number of trauma cases increased with each subsequent year from 2018 (N â€‹= â€‹4605) to 2021 (N â€‹= â€‹7331) (total N â€‹= â€‹23,727). In general, the proportion of Black or African American patients increased over time (2018: 19.2%, 2021: 23.0%). The proportion of patients insured by Medicaid (8.0% vs 10.5%) and Medicare (26.5% vs 32.8%) increased from 2018 to 2021. Comparing 2019 to 2020, we found increases in violent traumas: GSW (+88.6%, 95% CI 63.8%-117.2%) and stabbings (+39.6%, 95% CI 8.1%-80.3%). Trauma patient ED LOS decreased from 300 â€‹min (67-400 IQR) in 2018 to 249 â€‹min in 2021 (104-510 IQR). Conclusion: This analysis identified increased trauma volumes, especially violent trauma (GSW, stabbing, other penetrating). There was a greater proportion of Black/African American patients and those insured with Medicare or Medicaid during the pandemic. TED LOS decreased over time while ED mortality and hospital LOS remained stable.

Defensive Behaviors During COVID-19 and the 2020–2021 Firearm Purchasing Surge: A Latent Class Analysis

Objective: This study examined the extent to which political beliefs and public health behaviors cluster together and define distinct groups of individuals and whether those groups differ on firearm purchasing behaviors. Methods: 6,404 US residents (Minnesota, n = 1,789;Mississippi, n = 1,418;New Jersey, n = 3,197) were recruited via Qualtrics panels. Participants were matched to 2010 census data. Results: Fit statistics determined a four-class solution fit the data best. The Liberal-Many Health Behaviors class had high probabilities of voting for President Biden, reporting more liberal political beliefs than other classes, and engaging in multiple health behaviors (e.g., mask wearing, vaccination). The Moderate-Few Health Behaviors class had high probabilities of voting for President Biden, reporting moderate political beliefs, and engaging in few health behaviors. The Conservative-Few Health Behaviors class had high probabilities of voting for former President Trump, reporting conservative political beliefs, and engaging in few health behaviors. The Conservative-Many Health Behaviors class had high probabilities of voting for former President Trump, having conservative political beliefs, and engaging in many health behaviors. Of the participants in the study who reported owning firearms, those in the Few Health Behavior classes were more likely to have purchased firearms during the purchasing surge, whereas those in the Many Health Behavior classes were likely to have become first-time firearm owners in 2020-2021. Lastly, the Few Health Behavior classes exhibited significantly less trust in the intentions of scientists. Conclusion: Different subgroups of firearm owners may evaluate and respond to risk differently, resulting in a pattern of adopting or avoiding a range of public health recommendations. Those who avoided mask wearing and COVID-19 vaccinations and who purchased firearms during the firearm purchasing surge appear to have less trust in science, highlighting the need for trusted messengers to increase the reach of behavioral interventions. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology is the property of Guilford Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

"Not as Bad as the ‘90s”? Firearm Violence in Small, Mid-Size, and Large US Cities, 2015–2021

I examine firearm homicide and injury data from more cities (N = 1,328) during a longer timespan (2015–2021) than previous research on firearm violence encapsulating the Covid-19 pandemic. I contextualize the historic 2020 spike in gun violence within a broader trend of worsening gun violence impacting hundreds of US cities since 2015. More cities (364) are surpassing adverse homicide rate benchmarks observed during the 1980s–1990s, and US states situated in all regions contain numerous peak gun violence cities. Examining gun violence trends outside of the largest US cities is imperative, since 42% of all firearm homicides occur in places with populations <250,000, and over two-thirds of peak violence cities (243) have fewer than 100,000 residents. A shared sense of the scope and severity of the problem of gun violence is also urgently needed. For too many American communities, it's not as bad as the 1990s, it's worse. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Homicide Studies is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Best way to prevent firearm violence: Limit access to firearms

The increased publicity of mass shootings and the COVID-19 pandemic have fueled American demand for firearm purchases. Firearm violence has largely been blamed on people with mental illnesses instead of firearm accessibility, despite the lack of population-level evidence associating mental illness with firearm violence perpetration. We support interventions and policies to limit firearm access in homes, schools, and by all intimate partners who have been convicted of domestic abuse. We advocate for restrictions on the civilian purchases of semi-automatic rifles and large capacity magazines. Finally, we call for research addressing firearm violence as an environmental and structural issue, not an intrapersonal one.Key Take Away Points [list] [list] [list_item] Despite worsening mental health outcomes among American youth, there is little population-based evidence supporting an association between firearm violence perpetration and mental illness. [/list_item] [list_item] Firearm accessibility increases the risk for firearm violence and injuries. [/list_item] [list_item] Preventing school shootings requires both promotion of socio-emotional learning and restrictions of firearm sales from young civilians. [/list_item] [list_item] Provisions in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to regulate access to firearms is an initial step to reducing firearm violence. [/list_item] [list_item] Long-term reductions in firearm violence require structural approaches to improve social determinants of health. [/list_item] [/list]

The impact of COVID-19 on gun violence across census tracts in NYC

This study explores the impact of COVID-19 on gun violence in NYC and its interactive effects with neighborhood factors at the census tract level. Random effects negative binomial models are used to analyze monthly data from January 2017 to March 2021. There was a significant increase in gun violence during the pandemic. In addition, poverty, economic inequality, African Americans, Hispanics, residential mobility, and total population were significantly associated with increases in gun violence. However, there were no significant interaction effects between the pandemic and neighborhood characteristics. This study concludes with a discussion of study limitations and implications. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

COVID-19 and Gun Violence: Keeping Unknown Shocks and Volatility in Perspective

The current study estimates the varying effects of the pandemic on gun violence by social distancing type, fatality, and location. Interrupted time series analyses are used to examine weekly crime data from 2016 to 2020 in New York City. Box-Cox power transformation and GARCH techniques are used to address the problems of non-normality and heteroscedasticity in the models. There were significant increases in fatal and non-fatal shootings during the relaxation of social distancing. The impact of the BLM protests and depolicing is significant for non-fatal shootings. The pandemic led to greater increases in gun violence in The Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens, as opposed to Staten Island. In addition, there is some evidence of increases in the volatility of gun violence during the pandemic. High volatility implies crime rates are in severe flux, which then leads to greater uncertainty and fear for public safety. This paper surfaces useful information for guiding policy and practice.

Beating the Gun—One Conversation at a Time? Evaluating the Impact of DC's "Cure the Streets” Public Health Intervention Against Gun Violence

Violence interrupters (VI) operate as mediators after gang-involved shootings to stop retributory shootings. While some cities, like Chicago, have seen initial success, other cities, such as Boston, Newark, and Phoenix have seen little or mixed effects. This is the first evaluation of the Washington DC intervention. I use an interrupted time series model to measure the impact the intervention had on the rates of assaults with a gun using DC Crime Incident data. Recognizing that the Covid-19 pandemic is an important confounding event, I also run two time-series control models, a location control, and an outcome control. My findings indicate that the program was not effective in reducing gun violence. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Crime & Delinquency is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

When COVID-19 and guns meet: A rise in shootings.

OBJECTIVE: The present study examines the impact of the COVID-19 stay-at-home order on gun violence in Buffalo, New York: fatal shootings, all non-fatal shootings, non-fatal shootings with injury, and non-fatal shootings without injury. It also estimated its impact on gang and non-gang related shootings. METHODS: Weekly crime data are analyzed at the city level using ARIMA and poisson models. Forecasting is used to verify the validity of both ARIMA and poisson models. RESULTS: The effect of the pandemic was conditional upon the types of gun violence and impact models of intervention. The pandemic caused a temporary increase in fatal shootings while leading to a long-term increase in all non-fatal shootings, non-fatal shootings with injury, non-fatal shootings without injury, and gang related shootings. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has changed the volume of gun violence possibly due to increased strain and/or changed routine activities. This study not only promotes further research but also has policy implications for public health and safety. From a public policy perspective, criminal justice agencies should focus more attention and resources on gun violence resulting from a sense of strain and fear among individuals during the pandemic.

A new wave of mass shootings? Exploring the potential impact of COVID-19

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has brought much of U.S. society to a grinding halt, its impact on the occurrence of mass shootings is largely unknown. Using data from the Gun Violence Archive and an interrupted time-series design, we analyzed weekly counts of mass shootings in the U.S. from 2019 through 2021. Results show that total, private, and public mass shootings increased following the declaration of COVID-19 as a national emergency in March of 2020. We consider these findings in the context of their broader implications for prevention efforts as well as how they pave the way for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Gun violence in United States during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, gun violence (GV) rates in the United States (US) rose by 30%. We estimate the relative risk of GV in the US in the second year compared to the first year of the pandemic, in time and space. Methods: Daily police reports of gun-related injuries and deaths in the 50 states and the District of Columbia from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022, were obtained from the GV Archive. Generalized linear mixed-effects models in the form of Poisson regression analyses were utilized to estimate state-specific rates of GV. Results: Nationally, GV rates during the second year of the pandemic (March 1, 2021, through February 28, 2022) remained the same as that of the first year (March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021) (Intensity Ratio = 0.996; 95% CI 0.98, 1.01; p = 0.53). Nevertheless, hotspots of GV were identified. Nine (18%) states registered a significantly higher risk of GV during the second year of the pandemic compared to the same period in the first year. In 10 (20%) states, the risk of GV during the second year of the pandemic was significantly lower compared to the same period in the first year. Conclusion: GV risk in the US is heterogeneous. It continues to be a public health crisis, with 18% of the states demonstrating significantly higher GV rates during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same timeframe 1 year prior.

Changes in suicide in California from 2017 to 2021: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a major public health problem with immediate and long-term effects on individuals, families, and communities. In 2020 and 2021, stressors wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, stay-at-home mandates, economic turmoil, social unrest, and growing inequality likely modified risk for self-harm. The coinciding surge in firearm purchasing may have increased risk for firearm suicide. In this study, we examined changes in counts and rates of suicide in California across sociodemographic groups during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic relative to prior years. METHODS: We used California-wide death data to summarize suicide and firearm suicide across race/ethnicity, age, education, gender, and urbanicity. We compared case counts and rates in 2020 and 2021 with 2017-2019 averages. RESULTS: Suicide decreased overall in 2020 (4123 deaths; 10.5 per 100,000) and 2021 (4104; 10.4 per 100,000), compared to pre-pandemic (4484; 11.4 per 100,000). The decrease in counts was driven largely by males, white, and middle-aged Californians. Conversely, Black Californians and young people (age 10 to 19) experienced increased burden and rates of suicide. Firearm suicide also decreased following the onset of the pandemic, but relatively less than overall suicide; as a result, the proportion of suicides that involved a firearm increased (from 36.1% pre-pandemic to 37.6% in 2020 and 38.1% in 2021). Females, people aged 20 to 29, and Black Californians had the largest increase in the likelihood of using a firearm in suicide following the onset of the pandemic. The proportion of suicides that involved a firearm in 2020 and 2021 decreased in rural areas compared to prior years, while there were modest increases in urban areas. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and co-occurring stressors coincided with heterogeneous changes in risk of suicide across the California population. Marginalized racial groups and younger people experienced increased risk for suicide, particularly involving a firearm. Public health intervention and policy action are necessary to prevent fatal self-harm injuries and reduce related inequities.

A deductive thematic analysis of nurses with job-related problems who completed suicide during the early COVID-19 pandemic: A preliminary report.

BACKGROUND: Prior to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, nurses died by suicide more frequently than the general population. Antecedents prior to death include known job problems, such as disciplinary action; diversion of medications; inability to work due to chronic pain; and physical and mental illness. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the suicide experience of nurses who died with known job-related problems during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to what has been previously described. METHOD: Deductive reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyze narratives of nurses with known job problems who died by suicide from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Violent Death Reporting System. RESULTS: Forty-three nurses with known job-related problems completed suicide between March and December 2020. Factors associated with death were similar to previous findings with notable exceptions, increased prevalence of suicidal ideation and post-traumatic stress prior to the event. Pandemic-specific issues were noted including reduction in hours, fear of disease transmission, civil unrest, and grief-related trauma. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Suicide prevention programs need to address both institutional and individual factors associated with nurse suicide. As previously recommended, transitions into retirement and job loss are vulnerable times warranting psychological support. Further, strategies to reduce the impact of stressors and increase support for nurses are needed at the organizational level. A systems level approach to hardwire coping strategies is indicated pre-licensure and throughout nurses' careers. A new focus on how to process personal and professional grief is warranted. Resources are needed for nurses traumatized by life (rape, childhood trauma) or work-related experiences.

Clinical Rounds

Dogs can detect human stress... Children with COVID-19 at higher risk of T1D... ED-ICU not associated with substantially increased costs... Strategies to reduce pediatric deaths by guns... Electronic gaming and pediatric dysrhythmias

Impact of COVID-related policies on gunshot wound assault hospitalizations in the United States: a statewide time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: The CDC recently reported that firearm homicide rates in the United States increased in 2020, particularly among Black/African American individuals and men 25-44 years old. It is unclear whether firearm hospitalizations also increased, and more importantly, what impact the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-related policies had. Using the North Carolina Trauma Registry, a statewide registry of trauma admissions to eighteen North Carolina hospitals, we calculated weekly GSW hospitalization rates from 1/2019 to 12/2020, overall and stratified by race-ethnicity, age, and sex. Interrupted time-series design and segmented linear regression were used to estimate changes in weekly hospitalization rates over time after (1) U.S. declaration of a public health emergency; (2) statewide Stay-at-Home order; (3) Stay-at-Home order lifted with restrictions (Phase 2: Safer-at-Home); and (4) further lifting of restrictions (Phase 2.5: Safer-at-Home). Non-GSW assault hospitalizations were used as a control to assess whether trends were observed across all assault hospitalizations or if effects were specific to gun violence. FINDINGS: Overall, 47.3% (n = 3223) of assault hospitalizations were GSW. Among GSW hospitalizations, median age was 27 years old (interquartile range [IQR] 21-25), 86.2% were male, and 49.5% occurred after the U.S. declared a public health emergency. After the Stay-at-Home order was implemented, weekly GSW hospitalization rates began increasing substantially among Black/African American residents (weekly trend change = 0.775, 95% CI = 0.254 to 1.296), peaking at an average 15.6 hospitalizations per 1,000,000 residents. Weekly hospitalization rates declined after restrictions were lifted but remained elevated compared to pre-COVID levels in this group (average weekly rate 10.6 per 1,000,000 at the end of 2020 vs. 8.9 per 1,000,000 pre-pandemic). The Stay-at-Home order was also associated with increasing GSW hospitalization rates among males 25-44 years old (weekly trend change = 1.202, 95% CI = 0.631 to 1.773); rates also remained elevated among 25-44-year-old males after restrictions were lifted in 2020 (average weekly rate 10.1 vs. 7.9 per 1,000,000). Non-GSW hospitalization rates were relatively stable in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and statewide Stay-at-Home orders appeared to have placed Black/African American residents and men ages 25-44 at higher risk for GSW hospitalizations, exacerbating pre-existing disparities. Persistent gun violence disparities must be addressed.

Gun violence is a public health crisis that needs more applied criminologists

Research SummaryGun violence was declared a "public health crisis” after shootings increased in many U.S. cities during the course of the COVID‐19 pandemic. The public health approach to gun violence prevention offers many advantages such as an applied research model, the mobilization of a wider range of stakeholders, and a commitment to harm reduction. Too often, however, the public health community seems unaware of criminological research on gun violence and avoids including criminal justice interventions in their comprehensive plans.Policy ImplicationsCommunities need immediate relief from the persistent trauma of repeated shootings. Criminal justice interventions represent important responses to outbreaks of gun violence that should be included among recommended public health programs intended to address proximate and upstream causes of gun violence. Gun violence prevention policy and practice would be strengthened by more deliberate attempts to foster complementary public health and criminology research and development collaborations. More applied criminologists need to become engaged in gun violence research to meet this call.