Association of State Firearm Legislation With Female Intimate Partner Homicide

Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess the association between state firearm legislation and female intimate partner homicide. Methods: In 2017, the authors conducted a secondary data analysis of 16 states from 2010 to 2014, using data from the National Violent Death Reporting System, the State Firearm Law Database, and additional public sources. Poisson regression analyses quantified the association between the number of state restrictive firearm legislative provisions and the female population-based intimate partner homicide rate. For etiologic reasons, intimate partner homicide was disaggregated into homicide–suicide (intimate partner homicide followed by perpetrator suicide) and homicide-only intimate partner homicide (intimate partner homicide in the absence of perpetrator suicide). Results: There were 1,693 female intimate partner homicide deaths in the 16 states during 2010–2014; 67% were homicide-only intimate partner homicide. The number of state-level legislative provisions related to firearm restrictions ranged from four (Alaska) to 95 (Massachusetts). The intimate partner homicide rate in states with zero to 39 provisions was 1.16 per 100,000 person years (95% CI=1.10, 1.22) and in states with >40 provisions was 0.68 per 100,000 person years (95% CI=0.61, 0.72). The incidence of female intimate partner homicide was 56% lower in states with ≥40 legislative provisions (adjusted incidence rate ratio=0.44, 95% CI=0.28, 0.68), relative to states with zero to 39 provisions. This protective association was stronger for homicide-only intimate partner homicide than homicide–suicide intimate partner homicide. Conclusions: More state-level restrictive firearm legislation is associated with a lower rate of female intimate partner homicides

Enhancing Community-Based Participatory Research Through Human-Centered Design Strategies

Introduction. The purpose of this review is to compare and contrast the values, purpose, processes, and outcomes of human-centered design (HCD) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches to address public health issues and to provide recommendations for how HCD can be incorporated into CBPR partnerships and projects. Review Process. By consulting published literature, source materials, and experts on both approaches, a team of researchers completed a three-phased process of synthesizing key similarities and differences between HCD and CBPR and generating recommendations for ways to integrate HCD strategies in CBPR projects. Results. There are five HCD strategies that can be readily incorporated into CBPR projects to improve outcomes: (1) form transdisciplinary teams, (2) center empathy, (3) recruit and work with “extreme users,” (4) rapidly prototype, and (5) create tangible products or services. Conclusions. Integrating HCD in CBPR projects may lead to solutions that potentially have greater reach, are more readily adopted, are more effective, and add innovation to public health services, products, and policies

“He Will Not Leave Us Alone and I Need the Courts to Help”: Defendants’ Use of Nonphysical Violence in Domestic Violence Protective Order Cases

District court judges who make final determinations in domestic violence protective order (DVPO) cases in North Carolina indicate often using heuristics, such as the presence of visible injury, to guide their assessment of violence severity. This approach is concerning as it minimizes nonphysical intimate partner violence. We conducted a thematic analysis of DVPO plaintiff complaints to identify the types of nonphysical vioence described and its effects on plaintiff health outcomes. Most case files included descriptions of nonphysical violence and plaintiffs described fear as a significant mental health outcome. Findings highlight the potentially deleterious impact of nonphysical violence on the well-being of DVPO plaintiffs

From “Homegrown” to Research-Ready: Converting an Existing Practitioner-Developed Violence Prevention Intervention Into an Evaluable Intervention

There is an increased call for research on promising prevention programs already embedded in communities (“homegrown interventions”). Unfortunately, there is limited guidance to help researchers prepare these types of interventions for rigorous evaluation. To address this need, this article presents our team’s process for revising a promising community-based sexual violence prevention intervention for rigorous research. Our extensive and iterative process of reviewing and revising the intervention was guided by evaluability assessment (EA) approaches, implementation science, and a close collaboration with our community partners. Our EA process allowed us to specify the intervention’s core components and develop a “research ready” standardized curriculum with implementation fidelity assessments. We offer four lessons learned from our process: (1) even with existing materials and an extensive history of community-based delivery, community-developed programs are not necessarily research-ready; (2) close collaboration and a trusting relationship between researchers and community partners throughout the revision process ensures the integrity of core program components are maintained and implementation in diverse community settings is feasible; (3) observations of program implementation are a crucial part of the revision process; and (4) it is important to budget adequate time and resources for such revisions

Starting the Conversation: Are Campus Sexual Assault Policies Related to the Prevalence of Campus Sexual Assault?

One goal of university campus sexual assault (CSA) policies is to help prevent CSA. Federal guidance in the 2014 White House Task Force to Protect Students From Sexual Assault Checklist for Campus Sexual Misconduct Policies suggests 10 elements for inclusion in CSA policies (e.g., Policy Introduction, Grievance/Adjudication), and outlines policy topics to be included within each element (Policy Introduction includes two topics: statement of prohibition against sex discrimination including sexual misconduct and statement of commitment to address sexual misconduct). However, no research has examined whether CSA policies impact CSA prevalence. To begin addressing this gap, we studied 24 universities participating in the 2015 Association of American Universities Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. We linked 2014-2015 data from these universities’ CSA policies and their CSA prevalence findings from the 2015 Association of American Universities (AAU) survey. To test whether the comprehensiveness of schools’ CSA policies was related to schools’ CSA prevalence, we examined the degree to which the CSA policies included recommended policy content from the aforementioned Checklist. Policies were characterized as more comprehensive if they included greater numbers of Checklist topics. We then correlated the number of topics within the policies with school-level CSA prevalence. We also explored whether there was lower CSA prevalence among schools with policies containing particular topics. Results suggested that greater comprehensiveness of schools’ entire CSA policies was negatively correlated with CSA prevalence; however, these findings did not approach statistical significance. The number of negative correlations observed between schools’ CSA policy elements and CSA prevalence among undergraduate women was greater than expected by chance alone, suggesting a possible connection between comprehensive CSA policies and CSA prevalence. Schools with policies that included a topic on their sexual assault response team had the lowest CSA prevalence for both women and men, and schools that included topics describing grievance/adjudication procedures had lower CSA prevalence. This study provides a novel examination of CSA and could inform needed research related to the impact of CSA policies on CSA