This epidemiologic study of accidental dentofacial injuries to U.S. Army personnel was conducted to determine the frequency and distribution patterns of accidental dentofacial injuries to soldiers. Administratively, it was anticipated that this data would permit identification of high-risk groups and would suggest feasible preventive measures. This 9-month study was conducted on 16 Army posts with a combined population at risk of 210,500 soldiers; a standardized data collection form was completed by the dental corps officer treating the injury case and then was mailed to a central collection site for analysis. The data from this dentofacial injury study clearly reveal that differential risks exist for various military subpopulations. While the overall U.S. Army accidental dentofacial injury rate was 37.7 cases/10,000/year, this rate varied greatly for specific subgroups with high-risk factors including young males, lower enlisted ranks, recent recruits, and combat training posts. The primary specific causes of these injuries were fistfights (nearly 30%), sports (over 20%), and vehicles (about 15%).
Letter to the Editor Unfortunately, the Straus article is an example of actually going backward in its approach to domestic violence. It draws on very poor quality research by people with little connection to the broader field. The author, and critics like him, assumes that batterer intervention programs are a curriculum and format without ever understanding the notion of a coordinated interagency response, or a web of accountability, that includes battered women's safety as a primary consideration. It is actually about a wider interagency approach that puts the whole system to work together in an accountable way. Intervention also considers how the court systems stand behind the programs to ensure the programs are able to do their best work. Those two points are key to what the Duluth model is about-safety for victims and changing the climate of tolerance for violence, not just providing programs. To me, the Straus "reanalysis" is typical of how almost meaningless measurement gets narrowed down and distorted in a way that bears little reality for battered women or system change. It is very disappointing. So much of the research and accompanying claims really show a lack of knowledge of the field. There is a foundation of experience that comes from working alongside advocates, running classes with men, and seeing how systems work from the inside. This foundation is totally overlooked in Straus's response.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.