The lifting of a ban on federal funding for firearm injury prevention research has resulted in a surge of clinical trials and publications on gun violence, according to a recent report published in JAMA Surgery.
For over two decades, researchers interested in studying the causes, consequences, and prevention of firearm injury were hindered by severe restrictions on federal funding, which were imposed after the passage of the Dickey Amendment in 1996.
However, the situation began to change in 2013 when the interpretation of the Dickey Amendment was clarified. This led to the allocation of small funds to researchers, and finally, in 2020, federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) received reappropriated funds from the U.S. Congress, allowing for a rigorous study of this growing public health crisis.
According to the report, from 2020 to 2022, the CDC and NIH were awarded approximately $49 million and $100.5 million, respectively, for firearm injury prevention research. This increase in funding coincided with a 90% rise in registered clinical trials and an 86% increase in research publications compared to the period from 2017 to 2019. The data highlights a strong correlation between federal funding and the number of trials and publications on gun violence.
The study, led by Dr. Megan L. Ranney, dean of the Yale School of Public Health, in collaboration with colleagues from Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Yale School of Medicine, analyzed federal grants, registered clinical trials, and research publications related to firearm injury prevention in the U.S. from 1985 to 2022.
Of the publications reviewed, 47% (869 articles) did not report any funding, while 16% (300 articles) were funded by the NIH, 11% (197 articles) by the CDC, and 38% (706 articles) by other sources, including private philanthropic organizations. This showcases the significant impact that a robust federal funding environment can have on the scientific community, as many researchers undertook studies without federal funding support.
Dr. Ranney, who is also an emergency physician, emphasized that federal funding acts as a motivator and validator for investigators interested in studying firearm injury prevention. The study revealed that most studies (55%) assessed community firearm violence, 48% focused on firearm suicides, and 21% investigated unintentional firearm injuries. The researchers also found a positive correlation between annual federal funding amounts and the overall number of publications.
While the rise in scientific reports and intervention studies can, in part, be attributed to the current national gun violence crisis in the U.S., Dr. Ranney stressed the crucial role and impact of sustained federal funding in supporting firearm injury prevention research.
Dr. Ranney further stated that as firearm injuries and deaths continue to increase in the U.S., continued federal funding is essential for facilitating rigorous research and data-driven solutions. Research helps us identify effective strategies and directs our investments towards programs that make a real difference. Already, research funded by the CDC and NIH has demonstrated the value of innovative programs like the ‘See Something Say Something’ initiative, but further investment is needed to tackle this pressing issue effectively.
*Note:
1. Source: Coherent Market Insights, Public sources, Desk research
2. We have leveraged AI tools to mine information and compile it