↓ Skip to main content

Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Urban Health, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data
Published in
Journal of Urban Health, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11524-015-0008-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph B. Richardson, Christopher St. Vil, Carnell Cooper

Abstract

This paper examines an alternative solution for collecting reliable police shooting data. One alternative is the collection of police shooting data from hospital trauma units, specifically hospital-based violence intervention programs. These programs are situated in Level I trauma units in many major cities in USA. While the intent of these programs is to reduce the risk factors associated with trauma recidivism among victims of violent injury, they also collect reliable data on the number of individuals treated for gunshot wounds. While most trauma units do a great job collecting data on mode of injury, many do not collect data on the circumstances surrounding the injury, particularly police-involved shootings. Research protocol on firearm-related injury conducted in emergency departments typically does not allow researchers to interview victims of violent injury who are under arrest. Most victims of nonfatal police-involved shootings are under arrest at the time they are treated by the ED for their injury. Research protocol on victims of violent injury often excludes individuals under arrest; they fall under the exclusion criteria when recruiting potential participants for research on violence. Researchers working in hospital emergency departments are prohibited from recruited individuals under arrests. The trauma staff, particularly ED physicians and nurses, are in a strategic position to collect this kind of data. Thus, this paper examines how trauma units can serve as an alternative in the reliable collection of police shooting data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 21 27%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 27%
Social Sciences 16 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 4 5%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 17 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,643,255
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#225
of 1,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,280
of 365,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.