Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home - Article Example

Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home In which three counties/states did the study take place? Shelby County, Tennessee; King County, Washington; and Cuyahoga County, Ohio. (Kellermen, et al 1084) How large was the study’s population (total number of homicides)? Out of 1860 homicides in these locations, 440 took place in the victim’s home, which was the study criterion. The researcher excluded the younger victim in 19 double deaths, 2 homicide that were not reported and 3 late change to death certificates, the remaining 420 consisted of the population under observation. (Kellerman, et al 1085) Name three homicide locations included in the study? A home was defined by the study as being a house, an apartment or other dwelling occupied by the victim. Adjacent structures such as garages, etc., as well as the surrounding yard were also included. (Kellerman, et al 1084) Which three articles “validated” the control group selection process? The authors state that in order to, “… minimize selection bias,” (Kellerman et al 1085) They used the following three studies to validate their random selection protocol: Yu MC, et al “Hepatitis, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, and hepatocellular carcinoma in Los Angeles.”(1983); Mack, et al “Pancreas cancer and smoking, beverage consumption, and past medical history.”(1986); and Kellermann, et al,“Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership.” (1992) What type of sample selection method could this selection method be compared to? This method is most comparable to case control studies. (Kellerman et al 1088) What percentage of victims were killed by a firearm in the study? What percentage of victims were killed by means other than a firearm? 49.8% were killed by Firearms of various types, 26.4% by knives or sharp objects, 11.7% by blunt instrument, 6.4% by strangulation/suffocation, 2.4% by burns or smoke inhalation, 3.3% other. (Kellerman, et al 1086) Were case subjects more or less likely to have an alcohol problem than control subjects? This study found that the case subjects were more likely to have consumed alcohol than were the control subjects. (Kellerman, et al 1086) Were case subjects more or less likely to have been arrested or involved in a physical fight than control subjects? Yes, 31.8% of case as compared to 5.7% of control/ (Kellerman, et al 1086) What were the differences in the type of dwelling percentages between case and control subjects? The following table shows types of dwelling as compared to control and case (Kellerman, et al 1087): Dwelling Case Control Difference House 54.6 60.3 -5.7 Other 45.4 39.7 5.7 Rented 70.4 47.3 23.1 Owned 29.6 52.7 -23.1 The most significant difference is in Property ownership and rental, which may be significant in future studies. What was the reported adjusted odds ratio reported for the presence of one or more firearms in the household as related to a homicide occurring? It was 4.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.2 to 8.8 (Kellerman, et al 1087) What does Kellermann conclude about the practice of keeping a firearm in the home for personal protection? Kellerman concludes that her study shows that gun ownership is counterproductive to personal protection and is, “…independently associated with an increased risk of homicide.” (Kellerman, et al 1087) Essay Questions: What are some problems associated with the sample selection method used in this study? The author’s indicate that in order to eliminate bias and increase sampling statistical veracity they have used previous studies to validate their selection process. One of the issues here is that one of the studies was conducted by the same authors of the current study, certainly bringing up the possibility of bias. (Kellerman et al 1085) The authors state that: “To minimize selection bias, the controls were identified by a previously validated procedure for the random selection of a matching household in the neighborhood>’ (Kellerman et al 1085). This procedure included three different studies, two of which were medical/ disease related, which would have given a decent random sampling, bu the third was not only by the same authors but was approximately the same study, “Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership.” (Kellermann, et al 1992) This would certainly invalidate the randomization of the control group. Upon further examination one also sees that the other two studies were both by the same authors, Yu and Mack, further casting a shadow on the control selection. Perhaps a selection committee independent of the researchers may have been a better way to assure less bias. What are some problems that could arise from having a case group characteristically different from a control group (like in this article) in a research study? By choosing a somewhat dissimilar control the authors risk that the statistical average or normal may not be as accurate. Using a control group that has too divergent similarities with the case study could actually invalidate the results of the study. It is as if one used a placebo that actually had some affective additive in it as a control for researching a pharmaceutical. Discovery of that would immediately invalidate the study. Researchers vetting this study may find a problem with the control group. Do you think the conclusion reached by Kellerman is supported by the research presented (there is no correct answer for this question, be sure to support your answer)? While the Kellerman study certainly shows an indication that gun ownership in residence has an increased risk of homicide in the home, the variances in the study, death not attributed to guns were slightly more than half of the homicides committed by the case study selected.(Kellerman, et al 1086)For instance, the percentage of knives used for homicide (26.4%) were a close second to guns (49.8%) therefore the same inference could be drawn that knives in the home significantly contribute to homicide. Although an argument could be made that if knives were statistically as deadly as guns the percentage would be much higher. In a snese by focusing on guns, the most efficient method of homicide, they negate the violent tendencies that may be more pervasive in these homes, and the true eventual cause of death. References Kellermann, Rivara, and et al. “Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership.”New England Journal of Medicine 327 (1992):467-472 Kellermann, Rivara, and et. Al. “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home.”New England Journal of Medicine 329 (1993):1084-1091 Mack, Yu and Et. Al.“Pancreas cancer and smoking, beverage consumption, and past medical history.”Journal of the National Cancer Institute 76(1986):49-60 Yu, Mack, and Et. Al.“Hepatitis, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, and hepatocellular carcinoma in Los Angeles.”Cancer Research43 (1983):6077-6079 Read More