Cited by 45Gun Ownership and Violence ResearchTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesInjury Epidemiology and Prevention

Recidivism rates following firearm injury as determined by a collaborative hospital and law enforcement database

Marshall, William Aaron, Egger, Michael E., Pike, Annabelle, Bozeman, Matthew C., Franklin, Glen A., Nash, Nicholas A., Smith, Jason W., Richardson, J. David +3 more·2020·Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

Abstract

Background Recidivism is a key outcome measure for injury prevention programs. Firearm injury recidivism rates are difficult to determine because of poor longitudinal follow-up and incomplete, disparate databases. Reported recidivism rates from trauma registries are 2% to 3%. We created a collaborative database merging law enforcement, emergency department, and inpatient trauma registry data to more accurately determine rates of recidivism in patients presenting to our trauma center following firearm injury. Methods A collaborative database for Jefferson County, Kentucky, was constructed to include violent firearm injuries encountered by the trauma center or law enforcement from 2008 to 2019. Iterative deterministic data linkage was used to create the database and eliminate redundancies. From patients with at least one hospital encounter, raw recidivism rates were calculated by dividing the number of patients injured at least twice by the total number of patients. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate risk factors for recidivism. The cumulative incidence of recidivism over time was estimated using a Kaplan-Meier survival model. Results There were 2, 363 assault-type firearm injuries with at least 1 hospital encounter, approximately 9% of which did not survive their initial encounter. The collaborative database demonstrated raw recidivism rates for assault-type firearm injuries of 9.5% compared with 2.5% from the trauma registry alone. Risk factors were young ag…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ta.0000000000002746

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marshall, W. A., Egger, M. E., Pike, A., Bozeman, M. C., Franklin, G. A., Nash, N. A., Smith, J. W., Richardson, J. D., Harbrecht, B. G., Benns, M. V., & Miller, K. R.
Affiliations
University of Louisville (US)
Venue
Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Published
2020-08
Volume
89
Issue
2
Pages
371-376
ISSN
  • 2163-0755 (ISSN-L)
  • 2163-0763
OpenAlex
W3017500980
Cited by
45
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 6
FWCI
4.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Gun Ownership and Violence Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
Keywords
firearm injuries, recidivism, injury recurrence, violent assault, trauma registry, data linkage, injury prevention, risk factors, cumulative incidence, trauma center outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Black or African American, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Humans, Kentucky, Male, Recurrence, Registries, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Wounds, Gunshot, Incidence, Databases, Factual, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Law Enforcement, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Young Adult

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