Firearm Ownership and Storage Patterns Among Families With Children Who Receive Well-Child Care in Pediatric Offices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this study we examined firearm storage patterns and their associations in a diverse sample of families who attended pediatric practices from both rural and nonrural areas across the United States. METHODS: Parents who brought their children who were aged 2 to 11 years (N = 3745) to 96 Pediatric Research in Office Settings practices from 45 states, Canada, and Puerto Rico participated in an office-based survey before a well-child examination. The survey measured demographic variables; family history of guns in the home; and firearm types, storage behaviors, and ownership. RESULTS: Twenty-three percent of families reported firearm ownership. The majority (60%) of respondents reported making firearm storage decisions. Only one third of firearm owners reported safe firearm storage. Gun type owned was associated with storage habits, with long-gun owners storing their gun in places other than locked cabinets but with ammunition separate from guns and handgun users more likely to store guns loaded and to use gun locks. In a multivariate analysis, not being raised with a firearm was associated with safe storage behaviors. Families who had children aged 2 to 5 years and owned long guns were more likely to store their guns safely than families with older children. CONCLUSIONS: Few families reported safe firearm storage. Storage patterns are most influenced by firearm type(s) owned, family socialization with guns, and the age of the child. Primary care providers need to understand better not only whether firearms are in the home but also which types are present and whether parents were raised in homes with guns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".