"Using Crowd-Sourced Data to Explore Police-Related-Deaths in the United States (2000-2017): The Case of Fatal Encounters".

Open health data Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.5334/ohd.30
Brian Karl Finch, Audrey Beck, D Brian Burghart, Richard Johnson, David Klinger, Kyla Thomas
{"title":"\"Using Crowd-Sourced Data to Explore Police-Related-Deaths in the United States (2000-2017): The Case of Fatal Encounters\".","authors":"Brian Karl Finch,&nbsp;Audrey Beck,&nbsp;D Brian Burghart,&nbsp;Richard Johnson,&nbsp;David Klinger,&nbsp;Kyla Thomas","doi":"10.5334/ohd.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated the Fatal Encounters (FE) database as an open-source surveillance system for tracking police-related deaths (PRDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared the coverage of FE data to several known government sources of police-related deaths and police homicide data. We also replicated incident selection from a recent review of the National Violent Death Reporting System.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FE collected data on <i>n = 23,578</i> PRDs from 2000-2017. A pilot study and ongoing data integration suggest greater coverage than extant data sets. Advantages of the FE data include circumstance of death specificity, incident geo-locations, identification of involved police-agencies, and near immediate availability of data. Disadvantages include a high rate of missingness for decedent race/ethnicity, potentially higher rates of missing incidents in older data, and the exclusion of more comprehensive police use-of-force and nonlethal use-of-force data-a critique applicable to all extant data sets.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FE is the largest collection of PRDs in the United States and remains as the most likely source for historical trend comparisons and police-department level analyses of the causes of PRDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":74349,"journal":{"name":"Open health data","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10109543/pdf/","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open health data","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/ohd.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

Objectives: We evaluated the Fatal Encounters (FE) database as an open-source surveillance system for tracking police-related deaths (PRDs).

Methods: We compared the coverage of FE data to several known government sources of police-related deaths and police homicide data. We also replicated incident selection from a recent review of the National Violent Death Reporting System.

Results: FE collected data on n = 23,578 PRDs from 2000-2017. A pilot study and ongoing data integration suggest greater coverage than extant data sets. Advantages of the FE data include circumstance of death specificity, incident geo-locations, identification of involved police-agencies, and near immediate availability of data. Disadvantages include a high rate of missingness for decedent race/ethnicity, potentially higher rates of missing incidents in older data, and the exclusion of more comprehensive police use-of-force and nonlethal use-of-force data-a critique applicable to all extant data sets.

Conclusions: FE is the largest collection of PRDs in the United States and remains as the most likely source for historical trend comparisons and police-department level analyses of the causes of PRDs.

Abstract Image

“使用众包数据探索美国警察相关死亡(2000-2017):致命遭遇的案例”。
目的:我们评估了致命遭遇(FE)数据库作为追踪警察相关死亡(PRDs)的开源监测系统。方法:我们将FE数据的覆盖范围与几个已知的与警察有关的死亡和警察凶杀数据的政府来源进行了比较。我们还从最近的国家暴力死亡报告系统的审查中复制了事件选择。结果:FE收集了2000-2017年n = 23,578名PRDs的数据。一项试点研究和正在进行的数据整合表明,比现有数据集的覆盖范围更大。FE数据的优点包括死亡的具体情况、事件的地理位置、所涉警察机构的识别,以及几乎可以立即获得数据。缺点包括遗属种族/族裔的高缺失率,旧数据中可能存在更高的缺失事件率,以及排除了更全面的警察使用武力和非致命性使用武力数据-这一批评适用于所有现有数据集。结论:FE是美国最大的PRDs收集,并且仍然是历史趋势比较和警察部门层面的PRDs原因分析的最有可能的来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信