SIGNIFICANT, TIMELY, & RELEVANT FINDINGS
PROGRAM & POLICY STRATEGIES
TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
COMPLETE 2015 SOTS REPORT
COMPLETE 2013 SOTS REPORT
COMPLETE 2011 SOTS REPORT
INJURY AND VIOLENCE DATA
To understand and monitor changes to health issues, state injury and violence prevention (IVP) programs must obtain accurate and consistent data. However, the wide range of circumstances under which injuries and violence occur means that there are many different types of injuries, risk factors, and degrees of severity on which to collect data.
No single data source can provide all the information needed to accurately describe the burden of injuries and violence. As a result, programs must utilize data from a variety of sources, including vital records (death certificates), hospital discharge data systems, hospital emergency departments, crime reports, and many other sources in order to capture the full scope of an issue.
Access to Core Data Sets
- As in previous survey years, most states reported having access to and using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (100%), vital records (98%), the Youth Risk Behavioral Surveillance System (YRBSS) (95%), hospital discharge data (HDD) (88%), and Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) (88%).
- Most states who had access to data, used it. However, access to data sources varied by type. National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS) (78%), Uniform Crime Reporting System (UCR) (61%), and Medical Examiner (ME) (46%) were the least likely to be available for use by the reporting states.
Top Access to and Use of Core Data Sets, 2015
Use of Core Data Sets
- Sixty-four to 81 percent of states that reported having access to the top five data sources (vital records, BRFSS, YRBSS, HDD, and WISQARS) used the information to identify specific population groups that were affected by various injury or violence issues.
- HDD was the most common data set used to:
- identify topic-specific injury and violence issues affecting the state (92%)
- identify differences in injury or violence prevalence by specific population groups (81%)
- identify geographic regions disproportionately affected by injury or violence issues (78%)
- YRBSS was the most common data set used to identify differences in risk and/or protective factors among populations (69%).
In order to share key data findings with state and local partners, state IVP programs produced a variety of reports and print materials in 2015.
- Ninety-one percent (91%) of states indicated that they produced some type of report using injury and violence surveillance data.
- States most commonly produced fact sheets about injury in general or specific injury problems for the public and/or policy makers (80%).
- Others presented orally or via posters at conferences and workshops (72%), produced technical reports (37%), publications in print media (37%), and publications in peer-reviewed journals (37%).
Proportion of States Using the Top Five Accessible Data Sets to Identify IVP Topics or Populations,
Access to Data Professionals
- Since 2009, state IVP programs access to data professionals (e.g., epidemiologist, statistician, etc.) has decreased. Twenty-one percent of states report no access to data professionals in 2015, compared to only four percent in 2009.
- States with Core VIPP funding had an average of 2.5 FTEs of data professionals within the state IVP program compared to 0.86 FTEs among non-Core VIPP funded state IVP programs.
- Many states, however, had access to data professionals through multiple mechanisms such as within the state health department, or through consultants or ICRCs.
Top State IVP Program Access to an Epidemiologist, Statistician, or Other Data Professional, 2015, 2013,
2011, and 2009 by FTE