对“枪支立法如何影响枪支死亡率”的关键回应,重点关注加拿大和澳大利亚的证据

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Caillin Langmann
{"title":"对“枪支立法如何影响枪支死亡率”的关键回应,重点关注加拿大和澳大利亚的证据","authors":"Caillin Langmann","doi":"10.1016/j.hpopen.2025.100137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A recent review article in <em>Health Policy Open</em>, entitled “How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality internationally: A scoping review” claims that Australian and Canadian firearms legislation is associated with reductions in homicide and suicide by firearms. Unfortunately, the review overexaggerates the effectiveness of firearms legislation in Australia and Canada, leaves out some important studies, and does not rigorously examine these articles.</div><div>Eight Australian studies are referenced that examine the association between gun control legislation, primarily the National Firearms Act (NFA), and firearm homicide. Seven studies find no association between gun control legislation and firearm homicide. Only one study finds a reduction in female homicide but this is contradicted by a study using methods controlling for confounding factors. Four studies examining suicide rates and the association with the NFA find no associated benefit, including the single study that controls for confounders. Two studies find an associated decline in firearm suicide rates with the NFA but there is a decline in non firearms homicide rates at the same time that makes it impossible to know if the decline is associated with the NFA or another variable.</div><div>The results of the Canadian studies on legislation and the association with firearms homicide points to no beneficial association when more methodologically sound methods and studies are reviewed. Canadian studies on the association with legislation and suicide by firearm demonstrate a reduction in suicide rates with a substitution for other methods and no overall reduction in suicide rates.</div><div>Overall, Australian and Canadian studies to not appear to demonstrate beneficial associations with gun control legislation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34527,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy Open","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100137"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical Response to “How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality”, A focused look at Canadian and Australian evidence\",\"authors\":\"Caillin Langmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hpopen.2025.100137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>A recent review article in <em>Health Policy Open</em>, entitled “How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality internationally: A scoping review” claims that Australian and Canadian firearms legislation is associated with reductions in homicide and suicide by firearms. Unfortunately, the review overexaggerates the effectiveness of firearms legislation in Australia and Canada, leaves out some important studies, and does not rigorously examine these articles.</div><div>Eight Australian studies are referenced that examine the association between gun control legislation, primarily the National Firearms Act (NFA), and firearm homicide. Seven studies find no association between gun control legislation and firearm homicide. Only one study finds a reduction in female homicide but this is contradicted by a study using methods controlling for confounding factors. Four studies examining suicide rates and the association with the NFA find no associated benefit, including the single study that controls for confounders. Two studies find an associated decline in firearm suicide rates with the NFA but there is a decline in non firearms homicide rates at the same time that makes it impossible to know if the decline is associated with the NFA or another variable.</div><div>The results of the Canadian studies on legislation and the association with firearms homicide points to no beneficial association when more methodologically sound methods and studies are reviewed. Canadian studies on the association with legislation and suicide by firearm demonstrate a reduction in suicide rates with a substitution for other methods and no overall reduction in suicide rates.</div><div>Overall, Australian and Canadian studies to not appear to demonstrate beneficial associations with gun control legislation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy Open\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590229625000024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590229625000024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《卫生政策开放》最近发表的一篇题为“枪支立法如何影响国际上的枪支死亡率:范围审查”的评论文章声称,澳大利亚和加拿大的枪支立法与枪支杀人和自杀的减少有关。不幸的是,该评论过分夸大了澳大利亚和加拿大枪支立法的有效性,遗漏了一些重要的研究,并且没有严格审查这些文章。本文引用了澳大利亚的八项研究,研究了枪支管制立法(主要是《国家枪支法》(NFA))与枪支杀人之间的关系。七项研究没有发现枪支管制立法和枪支杀人之间的联系。只有一项研究发现女性凶杀案减少了,但这与一项使用控制混杂因素的方法的研究相矛盾。四项研究调查了自杀率及其与NFA的关系,发现没有相关的好处,包括控制混杂因素的单一研究。两项研究发现,枪支自杀率的下降与NFA有关,但与此同时,非枪支杀人率也在下降,这使得我们无法知道这种下降是与NFA有关还是与其他变量有关。加拿大关于立法和与火器杀人的联系的研究结果表明,在审查方法上更合理的方法和研究时,没有任何有益的联系。加拿大关于立法和枪支自杀之间关系的研究表明,用其他方法替代自杀率可以降低自杀率,但总体上没有降低自杀率。总的来说,澳大利亚和加拿大的研究似乎没有显示出与枪支管制立法有益的联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critical Response to “How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality”, A focused look at Canadian and Australian evidence
A recent review article in Health Policy Open, entitled “How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality internationally: A scoping review” claims that Australian and Canadian firearms legislation is associated with reductions in homicide and suicide by firearms. Unfortunately, the review overexaggerates the effectiveness of firearms legislation in Australia and Canada, leaves out some important studies, and does not rigorously examine these articles.
Eight Australian studies are referenced that examine the association between gun control legislation, primarily the National Firearms Act (NFA), and firearm homicide. Seven studies find no association between gun control legislation and firearm homicide. Only one study finds a reduction in female homicide but this is contradicted by a study using methods controlling for confounding factors. Four studies examining suicide rates and the association with the NFA find no associated benefit, including the single study that controls for confounders. Two studies find an associated decline in firearm suicide rates with the NFA but there is a decline in non firearms homicide rates at the same time that makes it impossible to know if the decline is associated with the NFA or another variable.
The results of the Canadian studies on legislation and the association with firearms homicide points to no beneficial association when more methodologically sound methods and studies are reviewed. Canadian studies on the association with legislation and suicide by firearm demonstrate a reduction in suicide rates with a substitution for other methods and no overall reduction in suicide rates.
Overall, Australian and Canadian studies to not appear to demonstrate beneficial associations with gun control legislation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy Open
Health Policy Open Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
40 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