MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401662323 · doi:10.1016/j.hpopen.2024.100127

How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality internationally: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4401662323 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brianna Greenberg, Alexandria Bennett, Asad Naveed, Raluca Petrut, Sabrina M. Wang, Niyati Vyas, Amir Bachari, Shawn Khan, Tea Christine Sue, Nicole S. J. Dryburgh, Faris Almoli, Becky Skidmore, Nicole Shaver, Evan Chung Bui, Melissa Brouwers, David Moher, Julian Little, Julie Maggi, Najma Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy OPEN · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersStrategy for Patient-Oriented ResearchUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityMassachusetts General Hospital
KeywordsLegislationBusinessForensic engineeringEnvironmental planningEnvironmental healthGeographyEngineeringMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The literature on gun violence is broad and variable, describing multiple legislation types and outcomes in observational studies. Our objective was to document the extent and nature of evidence on the impact of firearm legislation on mortality from firearm violence. Methods: A scoping review was conducted under PRISMA-ScR guidance. A comprehensive peer-reviewed search strategy was executed in several electronic databases from inception to March 2024. Grey literature was searched for unpublished sources. Data were extracted on study design, country, population, type of legislation, and overall study conclusions on legislation impact on mortality from suicide, homicide, femicide, and domestic violence. Critical appraisal for a sample of articles with the same study design (ecological studies) was conducted for quality assessment. Findings: 5057 titles and abstracts and 651 full-text articles were reviewed. Following full-text review and grey literature search, 202 articles satisfied our eligibility criteria. Federal legislation was identified from all included countries, while state-specific laws were only reported in studies from the U.S. Numerous legislative approaches were identified including preventative, prohibitive, and more tailored strategies focused on identifying high risk individuals. Law types had various effects on rates of firearm homicide, suicide, and femicide. Lack of robust design, uneven implementation, and poor evaluation of legislation may contribute to these differences. Interpretation: We found that national, restrictive laws reduce population-level firearm mortality. These findings can inform policy makers, public health researchers, and governments when designing and implementing legislation to reduce injury and death from firearms. Funding: Funding is provided by the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Evidence Alliance and in part by St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto. Scoping review registration: Open Science Framework (OSF): https://osf.io/sf38n.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.150
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.150
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0250.024
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.536
GPT teacher head0.668
Teacher spread0.132 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Policy OPENSame topicGun Ownership and Violence ResearchFrench-language works237,207