An analysis of American physician professional statements about gun violence against children

Abstract

Background: We examine the content of physician professional association statements and assess the extent to which these statements kept gun violence-especially against children-on policymakers' agendas.

Methods: After constructing a list of U.S. physician professional associations, we located position statements by consulting association websites, conducting a PubMed search, and reviewing the citations of identified statements. Once unique statements were identified (N = 32), two reviewers independently coded content such as major events, pediatric focus, firearm type, and policy recommendations.

Results: Recent statements appear to be timed following mass casualty events such as the Sandy Hook and Parkland school shootings. Associations have increasingly adopted public health framing over time. Nine statements focused on the pediatric population, while an additional 13 made reference to the pediatric population. The most common recommendations include increased gun violence research or research funding (84%), freedom of physician counseling (75%), mandatory background checks (72%), and safe storage (72%).

Conclusion: Based on this analysis, recent statement volume appears to be tied to current events rather than keeping daily gun violence against children continuously on the agenda. Mentions of "gun control" have receded over time and have been replaced by public health framing that places advocacy for firearm injury prevention in the physician's domain.

Level of evidence: III/IV.

Keywords: Advocacy; Gun violence; Pediatric trauma; Prevention; Professional medical associations; United States.