This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Wood, D. S. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wood, D. S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Validity of Injury Surveillance System Measures of Assault: A Lesson From the Study of Violence in Alaska

Washington State University Vancouver

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: woodd{at}vancouver.wsu.edu.

	Abstract

This article considers the validity of estimates of intentional violence using a statewide injury recording system: the Alaska Trauma Registry (ATR). One benefit of using data from an injury surveillance system is that its records are generated without police involvement, thereby reducing the likelihood of undercounting. However, there is reason to suspect that measures of violence derived from injury surveillance systems do not accurately measure underlying levels of assault in a population and are instead partly a reflection of influential patient characteristics. The ATR was used to compare assault injury cases of Alaska Natives with those of non–Natives to determine if patient characteristics varied between racial groups and to determine if those characteristics served to bias comparisons of injury rates. Results indicate that differences in assault injury rates are partly attributable to a greater proportion of Alaska Native patients being hospitalized for injuries of only minor or moderate severity.

First published on June 3, 2009
Journal of Interpersonal Violence 2009, doi:10.1177/0886260509334398


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?