Association Between Community Violence Exposure and Parental Firearm Ownership: Data from a Nationally Representative Study

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4965594/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Association Between Community Violence Exposure and Parental Firearm Ownership: Data from a Nationally Representative Study

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4965594/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 14 Nov, 2024

Read the published version in Injury Epidemiology →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

Firearm injuries are the leading cause of death for U.S. adolescents. Given the prevalence of firearm ownership in the U.S., particularly among parental figures in homes with children and teens, and the relationship between firearm access and injury outcomes, it is vital to shed light on potential parental motivations for keeping firearms in their homes. The purpose of this analysis was to examine whether exposure to community violence is associated with parental firearm ownership.

Methods

Data from the Firearm Safety Among Children and Teens Consortium's National Survey (6/24/2020-7/24/2020) was examined. The survey sample comprised parents of high-school-age teens (age 14–18). The survey examined various measures, including firearm ownership, storage, community violence exposure, and sociodemographic characteristics. Stepwise logistic regression was used to examine the association between community violence exposure and parental firearm ownership.

Results

Regression models demonstrate that community violence exposure is associated with an increased likelihood of firearm ownership among parents of high-school age teens (OR = 1.08, p < 0.05). Other significant predictors of firearm ownership among parents included parent age (OR = 0.99, p < 0.01), marital status(OR = 1.29, p < 0.05), and educational attainment (OR = 0.60, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The findings supported the hypothesis that community violence exposure was associated with an increased likelihood of parental firearm ownership, even after adjusting for potential confounders. These findings contribute to the existing literature by shedding light on the possible contributing factors for firearm ownership among parents of teens. Public health interventions focused on raising awareness about the risks of firearm access in households with youths, providing counseling on locked storage practices, and offering resources for accessing secure firearm storage options, such as rapid access storage, may contribute to reducing firearm access among youth. Additionally, community-based initiatives focused on violence prevention and addressing the root causes of community violence can help create safer environments, thereby reducing the perceived need for accessible firearms in the home by parents and caregivers.

community violence exposure

firearm ownership

parents

firearm violence

Firearms are the leading cause of death for U.S. high-school aged teens¹, with 89.9% of homicides and 51.9% of suicides among 15- to 24-year-olds in 2020 resulting from firearm injuries². Between 2010 and 2019, an estimated 93,938 U.S. emergency department visits were for nonfatal firearm injuries among youth aged 14 to 18^{3, 4}. Firearm injuries are associated with multiple long-term consequences³, including elevated rates of physical and mental health issues. Such injuries incur ongoing costs for affected individuals, their surrounding family members, and the healthcare system^{5, 6, 7}. The healthcare expenses, law enforcement resources, legal proceedings, and lost productivity associated with firearm-related incidents amount to a substantial burden on communities and the overall society. It is estimated to be around $493.2 billion per year in 2020⁸. Scholars examining firearm fatal and nonfatal injuries have also identified multiple disparities across age, gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation/gender identity groups⁹. For example, most firearm-related suicides and homicides among youth occur among males (89% and 87%, respectively)³. Firearm homicide rates among black youth are two to four times higher than their Hispanic and Indigenous peers and ten times higher than white and Asian youth⁹.

Across all injury intents, firearm access by high-school age teens remains the single most significant modifiable risk factor for all types of adolescent firearm injuries. Miller and Azrael (2022) found that 7 million more children lived in a home with a firearm than in previous years, and about 15% of firearms were stored unlocked and loaded^10,11. Scholars have also identified that unsecured firearm access in the home increases the risk of firearm homicide and suicide¹². Taken together, this suggests that there are risks in keeping firearms in homes with adolescents, especially if they are stored, unlocked, and loaded.

While researchers have demonstrated the nature of the reciprocal relationship between community violence exposure and firearm carriage among youths and young adults^13,14, researchers have not examined the relationship between community violence exposure and parental firearm ownership. In this study, we addressed this gap in the literature by examining the relationship between community violence exposure and parental firearm ownership. The analyses examined the relationship between community violence exposure and firearm ownership among a nationally representative sample of parents of high-school age teens. We hypothesized that after controlling for sociodemographic factors and individual parental exposure to violence, community violence exposure is related to an increased likelihood of firearm ownership. We examined cross-sectional data from a nationally representative sample with a multivariate analytic technique to explore this hypothesis.

Data are from the FACTS Consortium’s cross-sectional web-based Gallop survey of 2,924 parents and primary caregivers of high-school teens (age 14–18). The survey was conducted from June to July 2020, with participants recruited from the Gallop Panel, a probability-based panel of non-institutionalized citizens constructed to represent the overall U.S. population. Gallop regularly recruits panel participants using address-based sampling and random-digit dialing methods encompassing landline and cellphone numbers. It intentionally oversamples young adults (age 18–34), those from lower educational backgrounds, and those from under-represented racial/ethnic groups. For this study, eligible panel participants included parents and primary caregivers for high-school age teens (age 14–18), defined to include both biological parents and other primary caregivers (e.g., grandparents) that reside with the teen at least some of the time. Known caregivers were randomly sampled from the panel, and if they were found to have children aged 14–18, they were emailed invitations to participate in the study. Following informed consent, panelists self-administered the web-based survey (approximately 15 minutes). Remuneration was $5 for survey completion. The University of Michigan (U.M.) and Gallop IRBs approved all study procedures. This analysis focused only on the adult Caregiver sample.

Measures

Parental Firearm Ownership: The dependent variable for this analysis was parental firearm ownership (yes/no). Ownership was measured using a single item (“Do you personally own a gun?”) from the 2015 National Firearm Survey (NFS)^15,16.

Community Violence Exposure: Parent perceptions of community violence exposure, the primary independent variable, were assessed using a 9-item version of the "Things I have Seen/Heard" Survey¹⁷, measuring past 12-month exposure to a series of violent behaviors (e.g., hearing gunshots, seeing drug deals, seeing someone get shot) in their neighborhood. The standard response scale was modified to a dichotomous response (yes/no) for each item. A summary score (range 0–9) was created for analysis.

Control Variables:

The Gallup survey collected data on various sociodemographic characteristics, including age, biological sex, race/ethnicity, region, educational attainment, marital status, and military service. For analyses, race/ethnicity was categorized as non-Hispanic White or other, and educational attainment was grouped into those with or without post-secondary education. Additionally, respondents were queried about the presence of young children (under the age of 10) in their household, in addition to teenagers, as well as their receipt of public assistance, using questions derived from the 2016 American Community Survey. To assess the prevalence/frequency of partner (e.g., spouse, ex-spouse, dating partner) and non-partner (e.g., peers, friends, strangers, colleagues) victimization and aggression among various relationships, we used an adapted 9-item version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS-2)¹⁸, which captured incidents of moderate (e.g., pushed, shoved) and severe (e.g., hit, punched, used a knife/gun) violent behaviors. The adapted scale measured both victimization (i.e., actions done to the respondent) and aggression (i.e., actions done by the respondent) on a response scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (> 20 times). These variables were then used to create a standard summary score by centering the variable using the mean and sum. Supplementary Table 1 illustrates the coding schema for all variables.

Statistical Analysis

We analyzed the data with SPSS software at the p < 0.05 significance level. We weighted all descriptive statistics and analyses to be nationally representative of parents with teenage children. Bivariate and multivariable analyses comparing the independent community violence exposure and the dependent variable parental firearm ownership were first examined among the entire sample. Eighteen independent variables based on prior research were selected and added to the analyses^16–22. Stepwise regression modeling was used as it allows for clarity at multiple stages and simultaneous estimation effects at multiple level²³. To elucidate how such factors may increase the likelihood of parental firearm ownership, we ran four models: Model 1 examined demographic variables and other control variables, marital status, and education; Model 2 introduced parent-partner and non-partner victimization; Model 3 introduced parent community violence exposure. To examine the relationship between the control variables of biological sex, age, and education level, interaction terms between community violence exposure and each of those variables were created, respectively. Model 4 introduced the interaction between biological sex and community violence exposure. These interactions enabled us to examine whether the relationship between community violence exposure and parental firearm ownership changes dependent on the sex of the parental respondant²⁴.

Tables 1 and 2 approximately here.

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics for Exposure to Community Violence, Victimization, and Demographic Variables for Parent Firearm OwnershipN = 2,380
			Chi-Squares
	Parent Has a Firearm in the House
	No N (%)	Yes N (%)
Sociodemographic Variables
Sex			273.45***
Male	503 (39.1)	785 (60.9)
Race			14.39***
Non-White and/or Hispanic	449 (28.0)	274 (21.8)
Marital Status			12.20***
Married	1,308 (54.5)	1,093 (45.5)
Education			46.11***
Some College or Trade School and Beyond	1,209 (75.6)	803 (63.9)
Violence Exposure and Victimization Variables and Age
Scale and Continuous Variables	Mean	Std. Dev.
Age	47.50	9.80
Parent Community Violence Exposure	0.13	0.85
Parent Partner Victimization	0.10	0.61
Parent Non-Partner Victimization	0.05	0.47
p < 0.05, p < 0.01, **p < 0.001

Table 2

Descriptive findings regarding Community Violence Exposure among a Nationally Representative Sample of Parents of High-School Age Teens (age 14–18)N = 2,380
	% (N)
Heard guns being shot	30.1 (881)
Have seen somebody arrested	10.5 (307)
Have seen drug dealing	4.1 (121)
Have seen somebody get beaten up	1.6 (47)
Have seen somebody get stabbed	0.8 (22)
Have seen someone pull a knife on another person	0.8 (22)
Have seen someone pull a gun on another person	0.2 (7)
Have seen someone get shot	0.3 (10)
My house has been broken into	0.3 (8)

Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics for this analysis. Among all sampled households in this analysis, 43.1% (n = 1,261) reported firearm ownership. Most firearm owners were non-White and/or Hispanic, married, male, had completed some college/trade school (or beyond), and had an average age of 47.5 years old. Table 2 provides the types of community violence exposure within the sample. In total, 48.8% of the sample experienced at least one form of community violence exposure, with the majority indicating they had either heard gunshots (30.2%) and/or had observed someone be arrested (10.5%). Approximately 4.9% of the sample reported experiencing partner victimization at least once, and about 1.9% of the sample reported experiencing non-partner victimization at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey.

Table 3 approximately here.

Table 3

Hierarchical Logistic Regression for Exposure to Community Violence, Victimization, and Demographic Variables for Parent Gun OwnershipN = 2,380
Covariates	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3		Model 4
	β	exp(β)	β	exp(β)	β	exp(β)	β	exp(β)
Sociodemographic Variables
Sex: Male	1.27***	3.55	1.26***	3.52	1.25***	3.50	0.98***	2.66
Race and Ethnicity: Non-White and/or Hispanic	-0.01	0.99	-0.05	0.95	-0.06	0.95	-0.05	0.96
Age	-0.02***	0.98	-0.02**	0.98	-0.02**	0.99	-0.02**	0.99
Marital Status: Married	0.25	1.29	0.29*	1.33	0.28*	1.33	0.26*	1.29
Education: High School or Below	-0.54***	0.58	-0.52***	0.59	-0.50***	0.61	-0.52***	0.60
Violence Exposure and Victimization Variables
Parent Partner Victimization	--	--	0.12	1.13	0.12	1.13	0.10	1.10
Parent Non-Partner Victimization	--	--	0.06	1.06	0.06	1.06	0.04	1.04
Parent Community Violence Exposure	--	--	--	--	0.07*	1.08	0.08	1.09
Interaction
Interaction between Sex and Community Violence Exposure	--	--	--	--	--	--	0.35***	1.42
Constant	0.28	1.33	0.06	1.06	0.10	1.10	0.21	1.24
Note: p $\:\le\:$ .05; p $\:\le\:\:$.01; **p $\:\le\:\:$.001; Model chi-square: $\:\chi\:$² (12) = 276.83, p < .001

The multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that community violence exposure was associated with an increased likelihood of parental firearm ownership (Table 3). Model 1 examined demographic and other control variables, marital status, and education. Parent sex, age, marital status, and level of education emerged as significant in this Model, suggesting that younger parents (OR = 0.99, p < 0.01) and parents with less education (OR = 0.60, p < 0.001) had a decreased likelihood of owning a firearm, while households with married parents (OR = 1.29, p < 0.05) were at an increased likelihood. Model 2 introduced parent-partner and non-partner victimization. In this Model, we found that parent-partner and non-partner victimization were not significantly associated with parental firearm ownership. However, the sociodemographic variables remained significant. Model 3 introduced parent community violence exposure. In this Model, we found that exposure to community violence was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of parental firearm ownership (OR = 1.08, p < 0.05). Finally, model 4 introduced the interaction between sex and community violence exposure. The results of Model 4 suggested that an interaction between community violence exposure and sex does increase the likelihood of firearm ownership (OR = 1.42, p < 0.001), such that increased levels of community violence present in the areas where male parents live are associated with greater levels of firearm ownership.

This study examined the association of community violence exposure to firearm ownership among parents and caregivers of high-school age adolescents. Using bivariate and multivariable analyses, we found that exposure to community violence was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of parental firearm ownership, even after controlling for potential confounding variables. The results indicated that exposure to community violence, including vicarious exposure, significantly influenced parental firearm ownership. This finding underscores the complex interplay between perceived risk and protective behaviors among parents, particularly in environments where violence is prevalent. Hence, scholars should also consider non-direct personal exposures in future studies.

Moreover, the study highlights the importance of demographic factors in shaping parental firearm ownership patterns. Younger parents and those with lower education levels were less likely to own firearms, indicating potential differences in risk perception and protective behaviors across demographic groups. Conversely, households with married parents were more likely to own firearms, suggesting the influence of family dynamics and shared decision-making processes in firearm ownership practices. The identification of significant interactions between sex and community violence exposure further elucidated the nuanced nature of firearm ownership dynamics. The finding that increased levels of community violence were associated with greater firearm ownership among male parents underscored gender-specific patterns in risk perception and protective behaviors.

Interestingly, although exposure to community violence emerged as significant, prior partner and non-partner victimization did not. This unexpected finding might be due to lower levels of prior victimization among the entire sample. Indeed, prior research examining the effect of prior victimization on the increased likelihood of firearm carriage and ownership has focused on individuals with elevated rates of prior victimization^25,26. Researchers should further explore these connections in future research.

While there has been a linkage between firearm carriage and increased likelihood of serious injury and death²⁷ as well as firearm possession and community violence exposure¹⁴, to the best of our knowledge, this was the first study to examine the association of community violence exposure with parental firearm household ownership. Our findings shed light on the intricate relationship between community violence and parental firearm ownership. The findings underscored the multifaceted nature of firearm ownership dynamics within the context of community violence, highlighting significant implications for public health and policy interventions. Targeted interventions addressing community violence prevention and firearm safety education are warranted to mitigate the risk of firearm-related injuries among high-school age teens. Moreover, efforts to promote locked storage practices and firearm safety policies (e.g., child access prevention laws) are essential to prevent unauthorized access to firearms among adolescents. For parents with firearms in the home, as suggested by Sokol and colleagues¹³, intervention strategies should include activities that reinforce personal values of family safety and protection along with safe firearm storage. It is also necessary to emphasize the importance of locked firearm storage to reduce youth access, as prior researchers have shown that firearm carriage and access remain a significant risk factor for violent injury and death^10–12. Recent scholars have found that personalized secure storage devices and other new technology provide promise for firearm owners to have rapid access to their firearms while also preventing adolescents from accessing these guns^28,29.

Finally, given the relationship between community violence exposure and firearm use, this study also underscored the need for comprehensive approaches to address the underlying violence driving a perceived need for maintaining firearms for protection, including socio-economic disparities and community-level factors contributing to violence³⁰. Such upstream-focused community-level interventions have been shown to reduce community violence in areas with high levels of violence. Additionally, intervention and prevention strategies should include individual-level programs addressing violence reduction, such as conflict resolution and investment in academic programs, given the substantial overlap between general violence and community violence³¹.

Limitations

Despite this study's valuable contribution, it is not without limitations. First, it is essential to note that this study does not include parents with children under 14. However, while this is a limitation, our study does speak to the broad majority of adolescents who would be most at risk for intentional firearm use and injury¹. Second, this study focused on reported parental firearm ownership. We decided not to include broader measures of household firearm ownership given known issues with the reliability of individuals assessing other household members’ firearm³² ownership behaviors. Finally, the survey data was self-reported. While this presents the possibility for social desirability and/or recall bias, prior studies have demonstrated that these self-report measures are reliable and valid when confidentiality and privacy are assured, as was done in this study³³.

In conclusion, firearms have been the leading mechanism for death for 0- to 19-year-olds. Thus, it is imperative to understand the different factors that can lead to firearm access, carriage, and possession. This nationally representative survey study of parents and teens sheds light on the reasons for firearm possession in the home. As indicated by the findings, violence exposure had a significant impact on parental firearm possession, and addressing such community-level factors is a necessary focus of multilevel interventions as this may be a salient factor influencing decisions about household firearm ownership, storage practices, and subsequent injury risk.

This study provides valuable insights into the complex interplay between community violence exposure and parental firearm ownership among households with high-school age teens. By elucidating the drivers of firearm ownership and the associated risk factors, this study provides policymakers and public health professionals knowledge that can be used to develop targeted interventions to promote firearm safety.

Ethics and Approval and Consent to Participate:

This research was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Michigan and all components of this study were performed in accordance with the ethical standards as stated by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Consent to Participant

All participants provided consent prior to participating to Gallup and acknowledged consent to participate.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Competing Interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Funding

Research reported in this presentation was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under Award Number T32HD108054, and the data collection was funded by NIH/NICHD Award Number 5R24HD08714903.

Author Contribution

RC, MZ, and PC developed the protocol and survey. KP and JP conceptualized the project. KP ran the analyses, conducted the literature review, and wrote 80% of the manuscript. JP and PC wrote 20% collectively of the manuscript. JP, RC, MZ, PC, RR, and RS provided feedback as subject matter experts, edited the document, and helped oversee the finalization of the complete document.

Acknowledgement

The content is solely the authors' responsibility and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The sponsor was not involved in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Karissa R. Pelletier and the rest of the authorship team had full access to all the data in this study. They took responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of data analysis. Regina Royan receives financial support from JAMA Network Open as an Assistant Editor.

Data Availability

The data used in this study is available upon request from the Institute of Firearm Injury Prevention at the University of Michigan. The raw data will also be available in the University of Michigan's data repository, which can be found here: https://www.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/facts-open.

Goldstick JE, Carter PM, Cunningham RM. Current epidemiological trends in firearm mortality in the United States. JAMA Psychiatry. 2021;78(3):241–2. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.2986.
WISQARS National Violent Death Reporting System. Cdc.gov. Accessed July 2. 2024. https://wisqars.cdc.gov/nvdrs/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) [Online]. (2003). National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (producer). . [Accessed: September 25, 2023].
Patel SJ, Badolato GM, Parikh K, Iqbal SF, Goyal MK. Sociodemographic factors and outcomes by intent of firearm injury. Pediatrics. 2021;147(4):e2020011957. 10.1542/peds.2020-011957.
Pulcini CD, Goyal MK, Hall M, et al. Nonfatal firearm injuries: Utilization and expenditures for children pre- and post-injury. Acad Emerg Med. 2021;28(8):840–7. 10.1111/acem.14318.
Pulcini CD, Goyal MK, Hall M, et al. Mental health utilization and expenditures for children pre-post firearm injury. Am J Prev Med. 2021;61(1):133–5. 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.01.024.
Committee on Injury and Poison Prevention, American Academy of Pediatrics. Firearm-related injuries affect the pediatric population. Pediatrics. 2000;105(4 Pt 1):888–95.
McLoughlin RJ, Hazeltine M, Dacier BM, Hirsh MP, Cleary MA, Aidlen JT. Young lives cut short: The relationship between firearms and pediatric suicide. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2019;87(1):161–7. 10.1097/TA.0000000000002257.
Fowler KA, Dahlberg LL, Haileyesus T, Gutierrez C, Bacon S. Childhood firearm injuries in the United States. Pediatrics. 2017;140(1):e20163486. 10.1542/peds.2016-3486.
Lee J, Quraishi SA, Bhatnagar S, Zafonte RD, Masiakos PT. The economic cost of firearm-related injuries in the United States from 2006 to 2010. Surgery. 2014;155(5):894–8. 10.1016/j.surg.2014.02.011.
Miller M, Azrael D. Firearm storage in US households with children: Findings from the 2021 national firearm survey. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(2):e2148823. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.48823.
Seewald LA, Myers M, Zimmerman MA, et al. Firearm safety counseling among caregivers of high-school age teens: Results from a National Survey. Prev Med. 2022;165(Pt A):107285. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107285.
Chavez L, Kivisto AJ, Gray SL, Thomas KJ. Youth gun carrying and household firearm ownership in 22 US states. J Community Psychol. 2022;50(8):3640–58.
Sokol RL, Schmidt C, Miller AL, et al. Motivations for firearm possession and storage practices among urban young adults: Differences between parents and non-parents. Inj Prev. 2021;27(5):409–12. 10.1136/injuryprev-2020-043856.
Sokol RL, Kumodzi T, Cunningham RM, et al. The association between perceived community violence, police bias, race, and firearm carriage among urban adolescents and young adults. Prev Med. 2022;154:106897. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106897.
Azrael D, Hepburn L, Hemenway D, Miller M. The stock and flow of US firearms: Results from the 2015 National Firearms Survey. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation. J Social Sci. 2017;3(5):38–57.
Richters JE, Martinez P. Things I have seen and heard: An interview for young children about exposure to violence. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Mental Health. Published online 1990.
Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. J Fam Issues. 1996;17(3):283–316. 10.1177/019251396017003001.
Hidalgo B, Goodman M. Multivariate or multivariable regression? Am J Public Health. 2013;103(1):39–40. 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300897.
Woltman H, Feldstain A, MacKay JC, Rocchi M. An introduction to hierarchical linear modeling. Tutorials Quant Methods Psychol. 2012;8(1):52–69.
Johnson RM, Coyne-Beasley T, Runyan CW. Firearm ownership and storage practices, US households, 1992–2002: A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27(2):173–82.
Carter PM, Walton MA, Newton MF, et al. Firearm possession among adolescents presenting to an urban emergency department for assault. Firearm-Related Injuries and Preventions. American Academy of Pediatrics; 2017. pp. 90–8.
Branas CC, Richmond TS, Culhane DP, Ten Have TR, Wiebe DJ. Investigating the link between gun possession and gun assault. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(11):2034–40. 10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099.
Pelletier KR, Pizarro JM. Homicides and weapons: Examining the covariates of weapon choice. Homicide Stud. 2019;23(1):41–63. 10.1177/1088767918807252.
Pizarro JM, Zgoba KM, Pelletier KR. Firearm use in violent crime: Examining the role of premeditation and motivation in weapon choice. J Prim Prev. 2021;42(1):77–91. 10.1007/s10935-020-00595-z.
Bostwick L. Hierarchical linear modeling/multilevel modeling in criminal justice research. Published online 2021. Accessed May 31, 2023. https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1757404/hierarchical-linear-modelingmultilevel-modeling-in-criminal-justice-research/2488521/
Leppink J. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) vs. moderated regression (MODREG): Why the interaction matters. Health Prof Educ. 2018;4(3):225–32. 10.1016/j.hpe.2018.04.001.
Carter PM, Mouch CA, Goldstick JE, Walton MA, Zimmerman MA, Resnicow K, Cunningham RM. Rates and correlates of risky firearm behaviors among adolescents and young adults treated in an urban emergency department. Prev Med. 2020;130:105891. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.105891.
Nehra D, Bulger EM, Maier RV, et al. A prospective US national trauma center study of firearm injury survivors weapon carriage and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. Ann Surg. 2021;274(4):e364–9. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005043.
Miller M, Azrael D, Hemenway D. Firearm availability and unintentional firearm deaths. Accid Anal Prev. 2001;33(4):477–84. 10.1016/s0001-4575(00)00061-0.
Kondo MC, Andreyeva E, South EC, MacDonald JM, Branas CC. Neighborhood interventions to reduce violence. Annu Rev Public Health. 2018;39:253–71. 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014600.
Ali-Saleh Darawshy N, Gewirtz A, Marsalis S. Psychological intervention and prevention programs for child and adolescent exposure to community violence: A systematic review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2020;23(3):365–78. 10.1007/s10567-020-00315-3.
Schell T, Peterson S, Vegetabile B, Scherling A, Smart R, Morral A. State-Level Estimates of Household Firearm Ownership. RAND Corporation; 2020.

No competing interests reported.

InjuryEpiSupplementaryTable1.docx

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 14 Nov, 2024

Read the published version in Injury Epidemiology →

Editorial decision: Revision requested
17 Sep, 2024
Reviews received at journal
17 Sep, 2024
Reviews received at journal
13 Sep, 2024
Reviews received at journal
08 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
05 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
05 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
04 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
03 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
03 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
02 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
02 Sep, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
30 Aug, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
30 Aug, 2024
Submission checks completed at journal
30 Aug, 2024
First submitted to journal
23 Aug, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Association Between Community Violence Exposure and Parental Firearm Ownership: Data from a Nationally Representative Study

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

BACKGROUND

METHODS

Measures

Statistical Analysis

RESULTS

DISCUSSION

Limitations

CONCLUSIONS

Declarations

Funding

Author Contribution

Acknowledgement

Data Availability

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1