Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-j5c6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-04T01:13:25.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Exploring Differences in Estimates of Visits to Emergency Rooms for Injuries from Assaults Using the NCVS and NHAMCS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2009

By
Jacqueline Cohen  and
James P. Lynch
Edited by
James P. Lynch  and
Lynn A. Addington
Jacqueline Cohen
Affiliation:
Research Professor, H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management at Carnegie Mellon University
James P. Lynch
Affiliation:
Distinguished Professor, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York
James P. Lynch
Affiliation:
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York
Lynn A. Addington
Affiliation:
American University, Washington DC
Get access

Summary

Researchers seeking to provide a better understanding of crime statistics tend to compare survey-based statistics such as the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) with data from police administrative series like the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). Because these two types of data collections systems are so different, simple direct comparisons are of little value regarding limitations inherent to a particular data collection system (McDowall and Loftin, this volume). This chapter explores the NCVS data using a different perspective that compares data from the national crime survey of population with those from a national survey of establishments – the National Hospital Ambulatory Care Survey (NHAMCS). This comparison provides an understanding of how the design, instrumentation, and procedures of the NCVS may influence estimates of interpersonal violence, particularly that component of violence resulting in injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms.

The estimates of emergency room visits for injuries due to violence obtained from the NCVS are considerably smaller than those from the NHAMCS. The analyses include a series of adjustments to these estimates that explore the role of features specific to each survey in the observed differences. The household sampling frame employed in the NCVS receives special attention as a potential source of the observed differences. Investigating this source of divergence is particularly important because many of our major social indicators on the economy and participation in government programs depend upon household surveys.

Type
Chapter
Information
Understanding Crime Statistics
Revisiting the Divergence of the NCVS and the UCR
 , pp. 183 - 222
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, M. J., & Fienberg, S. E. (1999). Who counts? The politics of census-taking in contemporary America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Bates, N., & Creighton, K. (2000). “The last ten percent: What can we learn from late interviews?” Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Section on Governmental Statistics. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
Biderman, A., & Cantor, D. (1984). “A longitudinal analysis of bounding, respondent conditioning and mobility as a source of panel bias in the National Crime Survey.” Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Social Statistics Section. Philadelphia, PA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
Browning, K., & Huizinga, D. (1999). Highlights of findings from the Denver youth survey (OJJDP Fact Sheet). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2001). Four measures of serious violent crime. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. October 27, 2003 version of the data retrieved from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/4meastab.htm.
Cantor, D., & Lynch, J. P. (2000). “Self-report surveys as measures of crime and criminal justice.” In Criminal justice 2000: Measurement and analysis of crime and justice (Vol. IV, pp. 85–138). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Cantor, D., & Lynch, J. P. (2005). “Exploring the effects of changes in design on the analytical uses of the NCVS data.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 3:23.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2001). “National estimates of nonfatal injuries treated in hospital emergency departments – United States, 2000.” MMWR 50(17):340–346. Retrieved December 26, 2005 from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/mm5017.pdf.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). “Nonfatal physical assault-related injuries treated in hospital emergency departments – United States, 2000.” MMWR 51(21):460–63. Retrieved December 25, 2005 from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/mm5121.pdf.
Cook, P. J. (1985). “The case of the missing victims: Gunshot woundings in the National Crime Survey.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 1:91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1989). Multiple problem youth: Delinquency, drugs and mental health problems. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fay, R. E., Passel, J. S., Robinson, J. G., & Cowan, C. D. (1988). The coverage of the population in the 1980 Census. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Fisher, B. S., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). “Measuring the sexual victimization of women: Evolution, current controversies and future research.” In Criminal justice 2000: Measurement and analysis of crime and justice (Vol. IV, pp. 317–390). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Fox, J., & Zawitz, M. (2005). Homicide trends in the United States. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
Gordon, J. A., An, L. C., Hayward, R. A., & Williams, B. C. (1998). “Initial emergency department diagnosis and return visits: Risk versus perception.” Annals of Emergency Medicine 32:569–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huizinga, D., & Jacob-Chien, C. (1998). “The contemporaneous co-occurrence of serious and violent juvenile offending and other problem behaviors.” In Loeber, R. & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 47–67). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Keith, K. D., Bocka, J. J., Kobernick, M. S., Krome, R. L., & Ross, M. A. (1989). “Emergency department visits.” Annals of Emergency Medicine 18:964–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kindermann, C., Lynch, J., & Cantor, D. (1997). Effects of the redesign on victimization estimates (NCJ-164381). Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Lizotte, A. J., & Shepherd, D. (2001). “Gun use by male juveniles: Research and prevention.” Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Loeber, R., DeLamatre, M., Tita, G., Cohen, J., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P. (1999). “Gun injury and mortality: The delinquent backgrounds of juvenile victims.” Violence and Victims 14:339–352.Google ScholarPubMed
Loeber, R., Kalb, L., & Huizinga, D. (2001). “Juvenile delinquency and serious injury victimization.” Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Lucas, R. H., & Sanford, S. M. (1998). “An analysis of frequent users of emergency care at an urban university hospital.” Annals of Emergency Medicine 32:563–568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCaig, L. F., & Ly, N. (2002, April 22). “National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2000 – Emergency department summary.” Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics, No. 326. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved December 26, 2005 from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad326.pdf.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. (1999, August 17). “Person non-response trends for the National Crime Victimization Survey.” Memorandum to Documentation. Washington, DC: Demographic Statistical Methods Division, United States Census Bureau.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. M., Kellerman, A. L., & Oster, C. (1990). “‘Bounces’: An analysis of short-term return visits to a public hospital emergency department.” Annals of Emergency Medicine 19:752–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rand, M. (1997). Violence-related injuries treated in hospital emergency departments. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J. G., & Adlakha, A. (2002, December 31). “Comparison of A.C.E. Revison II results with demographic analysis.” DSSD A.C.E. Revision II (Memorandum Series #PP-41). Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved January 15, 2004 from http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/pp-41r.pdf.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. Gregory, Adlakha, A., & West, K. K. (2002, May). Coverage of population in Census 2000: Results from demographic analysis. Paper presented at the 2002 Annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. G., Ahmed, B., Gupta, P. D., & Woodrow, K. A. (1993). “Estimation of population coverage in the 1990 United States Census based on demographic analysis.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 88:1061–1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, T., & Mercy, J. (2001). Injuries from violent crime 1992–2000. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., & Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×