Cited by 208Gun Ownership and Violence ResearchInjury Epidemiology and PreventionHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse

Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Safe Firearm Storage

Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Simonetti, Joseph A., Rivara, Frederick P.·2016·Epidemiologic Reviews

Abstract

Despite supportive evidence for an association between safe firearm storage and lower risk of firearm injury, the effectiveness of interventions that promote such practices remains unclear. Guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, we conducted a systematic review of randomized and quasi-experimental controlled studies of safe firearm storage interventions using a prespecified search of 9 electronic databases with no restrictions on language, year, or location from inception through May 27, 2015. Study selection and data extraction were independently performed by 2 investigators. The Cochrane Collaboration's domain-specific tool for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Seven clinic- and community-based studies published in 2000-2012 using counseling with or without safety device provision met the inclusion criteria. All 3 studies that provided a safety device significantly improved firearm storage practices, while 3 of 4 studies that provided no safety device failed to show an effect. Heterogeneity of studies precluded conducting a meta-analysis. We discuss methodological considerations, gaps in the literature, and recommendations for conducting future studies. Although additional studies are needed, the totality of evidence suggests that counseling augmented by device provision can effectively encourage individuals to store their firearms safely.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/epirev/mxv006

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lethal means reduction through counseling and securing firearms with a safety device is a demonstrated, evidence-based suicide prevention strategy.

    “Lethal means reduction via counseling and securing firearms with a safety device is a demonstrated, evidence-based strategy for suicide prevention [85].”

    From Adolescent Suicide—Understanding Unique Risks and Opportunities for Trauma Centers to Recognize, Intervene, and Prevent a Leading Cause of Death (2022) · cites this paper as [85]

    The review reports that interventions providing free safety devices improved safe firearm storage practices, and its Intervention characteristics section describes counseling paired with gun locks. Its Introduction links safe storage to lower observed risks of self-inflicted firearm injury, but says storage *may* reduce fatal self-harm; the Considerations for future studies section calls for studies measuring injury outcomes after storage interventions. It therefore does not establish counseling plus a safety device as a demonstrated suicide-prevention intervention. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Brief physician counseling plus a safe storage device effectively increases safe storage of home firearms.

    “Studies have demonstrated that brief physician counseling, combined with provision of a safe storage device, is effective at increasing safe storage of home firearms”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [18]18. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27(2):173-182.
  2. [19]19. Karp A. Completing the count: civilian firearms. In: Berman E, Krause K, LeBrun E, et al, eds. The Small Arms Survey: Guns and the City. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2007:39-66.
  3. [22]22. Carbone PS, Clemens CJ, Ball TM. Effectiveness of gun- safety counseling and a gun lock giveaway in a Hispanic community. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159(11): 1049-1054.
  4. [58]58. Vogel RE, Dean C. The effectiveness of a handgun safety education program. J Police Sci Adm. 1986;14(3):242-249.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rowhani-Rahbar, A., Simonetti, J. A., & Rivara, F. P.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Venue
Epidemiologic Reviews
Published
2016-01-13
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
mxv006
ISSN
  • 0193-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-6729
OpenAlex
W2301422081
Cited by
208
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Epidemiologic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Washington
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Keywords
firearm injury prevention, intervention effectiveness, counseling, community-based intervention, clinic-based intervention, risk of bias
MeSH terms
Firearms, Health Promotion, Humans, Safety, Wounds, Gunshot, Program Evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review