Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers

Abstract Background After the publication in 1985 of Injury in America and the establishment of an injury center at the Centers for Disease Control, there was a concerted attempt to create an “injury field.” Main body Thirty-six (36) pioneers in the injury prevention field responded to questions abo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David Hemenway
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-12-01
Series:Injury Epidemiology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40621-018-0177-4
id doaj-6bce080a71c44b9b8ecf415e4225b198
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6bce080a71c44b9b8ecf415e4225b1982020-11-25T02:23:00ZengBMCInjury Epidemiology2197-17142018-12-01511610.1186/s40621-018-0177-4Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneersDavid Hemenway0Harvard TH Chan School of Public HealthAbstract Background After the publication in 1985 of Injury in America and the establishment of an injury center at the Centers for Disease Control, there was a concerted attempt to create an “injury field.” Main body Thirty-six (36) pioneers in the injury prevention field responded to questions about the major accomplishments and failures of their profession since the publication of the seminal Institute of Medicine report Injury in America in 1985. Much has been accomplished. Indeed, it is difficult to believe that before the 1990s there was no federal agency focused on preventing fall injuries, drownings, sport concussions or bullying in schools. There was no readily available surveillance data on fatal injuries, no national associations of injury researchers or practitioners, no American Public Health Association (APHA) injury and emergency health services (ICEHS) section and few injury journals. Hardly anyone wore seatbelts and virtually no cigarettes were fire-safe. Sadly, there has been little success at limiting firearm and overdose deaths as injury prevention remains a step-child in the health field with funding not nearly commensurate to the size of the problem. Training in effective advocacy has been proposed both to help attract funding and reduce injuries. Conclusion Injury prevention pioneers have much to teach current public health students, researchers and practitioners about the history and future of the field.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40621-018-0177-4Injury fieldInjury pioneersHistory
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author David Hemenway
spellingShingle David Hemenway
Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
Injury Epidemiology
Injury field
Injury pioneers
History
author_facet David Hemenway
author_sort David Hemenway
title Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
title_short Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
title_full Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
title_fullStr Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
title_full_unstemmed Building the injury field in North America: the perspective of some of the pioneers
title_sort building the injury field in north america: the perspective of some of the pioneers
publisher BMC
series Injury Epidemiology
issn 2197-1714
publishDate 2018-12-01
description Abstract Background After the publication in 1985 of Injury in America and the establishment of an injury center at the Centers for Disease Control, there was a concerted attempt to create an “injury field.” Main body Thirty-six (36) pioneers in the injury prevention field responded to questions about the major accomplishments and failures of their profession since the publication of the seminal Institute of Medicine report Injury in America in 1985. Much has been accomplished. Indeed, it is difficult to believe that before the 1990s there was no federal agency focused on preventing fall injuries, drownings, sport concussions or bullying in schools. There was no readily available surveillance data on fatal injuries, no national associations of injury researchers or practitioners, no American Public Health Association (APHA) injury and emergency health services (ICEHS) section and few injury journals. Hardly anyone wore seatbelts and virtually no cigarettes were fire-safe. Sadly, there has been little success at limiting firearm and overdose deaths as injury prevention remains a step-child in the health field with funding not nearly commensurate to the size of the problem. Training in effective advocacy has been proposed both to help attract funding and reduce injuries. Conclusion Injury prevention pioneers have much to teach current public health students, researchers and practitioners about the history and future of the field.
topic Injury field
Injury pioneers
History
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40621-018-0177-4
work_keys_str_mv AT davidhemenway buildingtheinjuryfieldinnorthamericatheperspectiveofsomeofthepioneers
_version_ 1724860553845800960