Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden

Abstract Background The mass shooting phenomenon has gained much attention lately as this form of gun violence appears to increase in frequency. Although many organizations collect information on mass shootings (fatal and nonfatal injuries), no federal definition of this phrase exists. The purpose o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marisa Booty, Jayne O’Dwyer, Daniel Webster, Alex McCourt, Cassandra Crifasi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-12-01
Series:Injury Epidemiology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-019-0226-7
id doaj-3797b84b3c5a422199abf69fceecd103
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3797b84b3c5a422199abf69fceecd1032020-12-06T12:18:52ZengBMCInjury Epidemiology2197-17142019-12-01611810.1186/s40621-019-0226-7Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burdenMarisa Booty0Jayne O’Dwyer1Daniel Webster2Alex McCourt3Cassandra Crifasi4Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthAbstract Background The mass shooting phenomenon has gained much attention lately as this form of gun violence appears to increase in frequency. Although many organizations collect information on mass shootings (fatal and nonfatal injuries), no federal definition of this phrase exists. The purpose of this study was to highlight the different statistics that result among databases that define and track “mass shootings.” Establishing definitive guidelines for a mass shooting definition could improve research credibility when presenting evidence to policy makers. Methods We obtained data for mass shootings that occurred in 2017 from four sources: Gun Violence Archive, Mother Jones Investigation, Everytown for Gun Safety, and FBI’s Supplemental Homicide Report. We also examined FBI’s Active Shooter Report to compare the mass shootings datasets with active shooter situations, which have been federally defined. First, we examined the overlap among databases. Then, we applied the strictest fatal mass shooting definition to the mass shooting datasets to determine whether the differences in databases could be contributing to differences in fatalities and injuries recorded. Results Gun Violence Archive recorded the most mass shooting incidents at 346 incidents in 2017, while Mother Jones only recorded 11 cases. Only 2 events were found in all four mass shooting datasets. When the strictest definition – four or more individuals fatally shot – was applied to all datasets, the number of mass shootings in 2017 ranged from 24 (Gun Violence Archive) to 5 (Mother Jones), but incidents collected still varied. Conclusions There is much variety in statistics obtained from the different sources that have collected mass shooting information, with little overlap among databases. Researchers should advocate for a standard definition that considers both fatalities and nonfatalities to most appropriately convey the burden of mass shootings on gun violence.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-019-0226-7Mass shootingsFirearmsGun violence
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marisa Booty
Jayne O’Dwyer
Daniel Webster
Alex McCourt
Cassandra Crifasi
spellingShingle Marisa Booty
Jayne O’Dwyer
Daniel Webster
Alex McCourt
Cassandra Crifasi
Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
Injury Epidemiology
Mass shootings
Firearms
Gun violence
author_facet Marisa Booty
Jayne O’Dwyer
Daniel Webster
Alex McCourt
Cassandra Crifasi
author_sort Marisa Booty
title Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
title_short Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
title_full Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
title_fullStr Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
title_full_unstemmed Describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
title_sort describing a “mass shooting”: the role of databases in understanding burden
publisher BMC
series Injury Epidemiology
issn 2197-1714
publishDate 2019-12-01
description Abstract Background The mass shooting phenomenon has gained much attention lately as this form of gun violence appears to increase in frequency. Although many organizations collect information on mass shootings (fatal and nonfatal injuries), no federal definition of this phrase exists. The purpose of this study was to highlight the different statistics that result among databases that define and track “mass shootings.” Establishing definitive guidelines for a mass shooting definition could improve research credibility when presenting evidence to policy makers. Methods We obtained data for mass shootings that occurred in 2017 from four sources: Gun Violence Archive, Mother Jones Investigation, Everytown for Gun Safety, and FBI’s Supplemental Homicide Report. We also examined FBI’s Active Shooter Report to compare the mass shootings datasets with active shooter situations, which have been federally defined. First, we examined the overlap among databases. Then, we applied the strictest fatal mass shooting definition to the mass shooting datasets to determine whether the differences in databases could be contributing to differences in fatalities and injuries recorded. Results Gun Violence Archive recorded the most mass shooting incidents at 346 incidents in 2017, while Mother Jones only recorded 11 cases. Only 2 events were found in all four mass shooting datasets. When the strictest definition – four or more individuals fatally shot – was applied to all datasets, the number of mass shootings in 2017 ranged from 24 (Gun Violence Archive) to 5 (Mother Jones), but incidents collected still varied. Conclusions There is much variety in statistics obtained from the different sources that have collected mass shooting information, with little overlap among databases. Researchers should advocate for a standard definition that considers both fatalities and nonfatalities to most appropriately convey the burden of mass shootings on gun violence.
topic Mass shootings
Firearms
Gun violence
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-019-0226-7
work_keys_str_mv AT marisabooty describingamassshootingtheroleofdatabasesinunderstandingburden
AT jayneodwyer describingamassshootingtheroleofdatabasesinunderstandingburden
AT danielwebster describingamassshootingtheroleofdatabasesinunderstandingburden
AT alexmccourt describingamassshootingtheroleofdatabasesinunderstandingburden
AT cassandracrifasi describingamassshootingtheroleofdatabasesinunderstandingburden
_version_ 1724399072313344000