Letters to the editor in response to studies of guns in the home and homicide and suicide
Tóm tắt
Letters to the editor are an important venue for scientific discussion and ensuring accountability of authors and editors. We investigated the content and tone of letters to the editor published in response to research on having a firearm in the home as it relates to homicide and suicide. A recent meta-analysis found 16 analytic studies of household firearm access and homicide and suicide. We audited the letters to the editor emanating from those 16 articles. Each letter was coded for themes by two raters and analyzed using descriptive statistics and cluster analysis. For comparison, we also coded and analyzed the content of letters to the editor written in response to all other articles that were published in the same journal volumes where the firearm articles appeared. We identified 30 letters regarding the gun in the home studies: 24 (80%) letters to the editor and 6 (20%) replies from original authors. Of the 24 letters to the editor, 30% contained no scientific discussion, 46% made a political reference, 17% criticized the original author’s character, and 25% criticized the journal. Moreover, 29% made a pro-gun reference, 25% made an anti-gun reference, 13% referred to the constitutional right to bear arms, 13% referred to the National Rifle Association (NRA), and 0% referred to advocacy organizations known to be in opposition to the NRA. Of these themes mentioned in letters to the editor, only the NRA was mentioned in a response by an original author. The median number of scientific citations in letters to the editor was one versus four in replies from original authors. In the articles on topics other than firearms that were analyzed as a point of comparison, only 8% contained no scientific discussion, 4% made a political reference, 2% criticized the authors’ character, and 0% criticized the journal. Letters to the editor in response to epidemiologic research on guns in the home contain considerable content that minimally advances scientific discussion; author responses meet a higher standard for science and civility, as do letters to the editor regarding research topics other than firearms. The scientific study of firearm violence could be better served with more letters containing greater scientific commentary and dissent.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Anglemyer A, Horvath T, Rutherford G. The accessibility of firearms and risk for suicide and homicide victimization among household members (vol 160, pg 101, 2014). Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(9):658–9.
Branas CC, Wiebe DJ, Schwab CW, Richmond TS. Getting past the “f” word in federally funded public health research. Inj Prev. 2005;11(3):191.
Branas CC, Richmond TS, Culhane DP, Ten Have TR, Wiebe DJ. Investigating the link between gun possession and gun assault. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(11):2034–40.
Branas CC, Richmond TS, Culhane DP, Ten Have TR, Wiebe DJ. Branas et al. response. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(6):968.
Collier R. When postpublication peer review stings. CMAJ. 2014;186(12):904.
Doll R, Hill AB. Smoking and Carcinoma of the Lung. Br Med J. 1950;2(4682):739–48.
Frey HS. To the editor. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(26):1879.
Fritz DA. Lies, damned lies, and statistics. Ann Emerg Med. 2004;43(1):141. author reply 141–2.
Gøtzsche PC, Delamothe T, Godlee F, Lundh A. Adequacy of authors’ replies to criticism raised in electronic letters to the editor: cohort study. BMJ. 2010;341:c3926.
Horton R. Postpublication criticism and the shaping of clinical knowledge. JAMA. 2002;287(21):2843–7.
ICJME. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholary work in medical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Accessed 2/2/2015. Available at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/. 2014.
Johnston L. Smoking and Carcinoma of the Lung. Br Med J. 1950;2(4686):1004–4.
Kellermann AL, Rivara FP, Somes G, Reay DT, Francisco J, Banton JG, et al. Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(7):467–73.
Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1985.
Minichiello V, Aroni R, Timewell E, Alexander L. In-depth interviewing: researching people. Hong Kong: Longman Cheshire; 1990.
Morgenstern H. Gun availability and violent death. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(6):899–901.
Rosenberg ML, Mercy JA, Houk VN. Guns and Adolescent Suicides. JAMA. 1991;266(21):3030–0.
Slavov N. Point of view: Making the most of peer review. eLife. 2015;4:e12708.
StataCorp. 2013. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
Tierney E, O’Rourke C, Fenton JE. What is the role of ‘the letter to the editor’? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272(9):2089–93.
Wiebe DJ. Homicide and suicide risks associated with firearms in the home: a national case-control study. Ann Emerg Med. 2003;41:771–82.
Wiebe DJ. In reply. Ann Emerg Med. 2004;43(1):141–2.
Wiebe DJ, Branas CC. Bias when using dead controls to study handgun purchase as a risk factor for violent death. Inj Prev. 2003;9(4):381–2.
Wintemute G. Flaws in study of firearm possession and risk for assault. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(6):967–8.
Zhang Y, Wildemuth BM. Qualitative analysis of content. In: Wildemuth B, editor. Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science Westport. CT: Libraries Unlimited; 2009. p. 308–19.