IMPORTANCEPublic health measures instituted to reduce the spread of COVID-19 led to severe disruptions to the structure of daily life, and the resultant social and financial impact may have contributed to an increase in violence. OBJECTIVE To examine the trends in violent penetrating injuries during the first COVID-19 pandemic year compared with previous years. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cross-sectional study was performed to compare the prevalence of violent penetrating injuries during the first COVID-19 pandemic year, March 2020 to February 2021, with the previous 5 years, March 2015 to February 2020. This study was performed among all patients with a violent penetrating injury presenting at Boston Medical Center, an urban, level I trauma center that is the largest safety-net hospital and busiest trauma center in New England. Data were analyzed from January 4 to November 29, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes were the incidence and timing of emergency department presentation for violent penetrating injuries during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the previous 5 years. Patient demographics and injury characteristics were also assessed. RESULTS A total of 2383 patients (median [IQR] age, 29.5 [23.4-39.3] years; 2032 [85.4%] men and 351 [14.6%] women) presenting for a violent penetrating injury were evaluated, including 1567 Black patients (65.7%), 448 Hispanic patients (18.8%), and 210 White patients (8.8%). There was an increase in injuries during the first pandemic year compared with the previous 5 years, with an increase in shootings (mean [SD], 0.61 [0.89] injuries per day vs 0.46 [0.76] injuries per day; P = .002) but not stabbings (mean [SD], 0.60 [0.79] injuries per day vs 0.60 [0.82] injuries per day; P = .78). This surge in firearm violence began while Massachusetts was still under a stay-at-home advisory and before large-scale racial justice protests began. Patients presenting with violent penetrating injuries in the pandemic surge months (April-October 2020) compared with the same period in previous years were disproportionately male (153 patients [93.3%] vs 510 patients [87.6%]; P = .04), unemployed (70 patients [57.4%] vs 221 patients [46.6%]; P = .03), and Hispanic (40 patients [26.0%] vs 99 patients [17.9%]; P = .009), with a concurrent decrease in White patients (0 patients vs 26 patients [4.7%]), and were more likely to have no previous history of violent penetrating injury (146 patients [89.0%] vs 471 patients [80.9%]; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThese findings suggest that unprecedented measures implemented to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 were associated with an increase in gun violence.As the pandemic abates, efforts at community violence prevention and intervention must be redoubled to defend communities against the epidemic of violence.

No abstract

This article contextualizes the exploration of sibling homicide, or siblicide, a phenomenon that traditionally has received very little attention within the academic literature. Siblicide is examined in relation to other family homicides and other known homicides. Given the traditional frequency, duration, and intensity of youthful sibling relationships, juvenile homicides are disaggregated from adult homicides to reveal whether there are any differences. Although previous research has questioned the use of the Supplementary Homicide Reports for this type of analysis (Daly, Wilson, Salmon, Hiraiwa-Hasegawa, & Hasegawa 2001), the utility of the data set is demonstrated. The results of this exploration suggest that siblicide may be examined within the theoretical contexts of sociobiology and routine activities theory.

There has been a call to better link public health and criminal justice approaches to best address crime problems generally, and youth and gang violence in particular. Importantly, there has yet to be a systematic examination of how criminal justice approaches can be integrated within a public health framework. This paper examines the strengths and challenges with mapping gang research and evidence-informed practices onto a public health approach. Conceptual examination reveals benefits to utilizing an integrated framework, but it also exposes core problems with identification and prediction of gang joining and gang membership. The gang label as a master status is called into question. It is argued that a public health framework can inform public policy approaches as to when the focus should be youth violence versus gangs and gang violence.