Background: Youth violence in the US is reflected as major public health problem in Healthy People 2020. Homicide is the third leading cause of death among US youth aged 10-24 years. In 2017, about 10% high school (HS) students reported having been involved in fighting and 16% carrying weapons on school property.

Objectives: This study aims to examine the association between physical fighting on school property and carrying weapons among HS students in the US.

Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of 10,197 HS students who participated in 2017 YRBSS. We estimated weighted percentages and weighted logistic regression models for examining the association between physical fighting on school property and carrying weapons by HS students.

Results: Results show HS students who are involved in physical fighting at the school property are 5 times (uOR=5.28; 95%CI: 3.63-7.68; p<0.001) more likely to carry weapon on school property. The results also show that HS students who are involved in physical fighting at the school property are about 4 times (aOR=3.66; 95%CI: 2.46-5.45; p<0.001) more likely to carry weapon on school property after adjusted for the effect of socio-demographic, behavioral and mental health indicators.

Conclusion: Violence is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among HS students in the US. Findings suggest that physical fighting among HS students is widespread and positively associated with victimization injured with weapon. Intervention programs preventing these risky behaviors as well as further attention on the association between physical fighting and victimization at school through longitudinal research are warranted.

Statement of Purpose

To determine whether adolescents surviving assault (including by firearm) have increased long-term homicide risk relative to those surviving unintentional trauma (UT) and to explore the impact of neighborhood deprivation.

Methods/Approach

We analyzed adolescents 12–16 years within a broader retrospective cohort who presented to three trauma centers in Northern California between 1/1/2000 and 12/31/2009. Death and homicide after surviving initial hospitalization was determined by querying the Social Security Death Master File and California Vital Statistics through 2014. We specified Cox proportional hazards models, which included neighborhood deprivation index (NDI) by census tract. We balanced confounders between exposure groups using the inverse probability treatment weighting approach based on propensity score.

Results

Among 758 assault and 2270 UT patients who survived index hospital visit, 37 died by subsequent homicide. Assault did not convey a difference in risk of subsequent homicide compared to UT (AHR 1.80, 95% CI=0.87-3.72). NDI was neither an independent risk factor nor confounder between assault and homicide. However, there was an increased risk of homicide after assault among those living in low NDI (AHR 2.34, 95% CI=1.25–4.40) but not in high NDI (AHR 0.791, 95% CI=0.42–1.48) neighborhoods.

Conclusions

NDI may be an effect modifier in the relationship between assault exposure and subsequent homicide risk among adolescents. Highly deprived neighborhoods may convey a compound array of risk factors related to community-level violence, among which exposure to assault may be inconsequential.

Background: Despite extensive research, teen dating violence (TDV) prevention research/efforts lack clear, empirically identified protective factors that longitudinally demonstrate reduced risk for perpetration, particularly that move beyond the individual level. The current examination assessed multi-level protective and risk factors for TDV perpetration among a community-based sample of Latino adolescents living in an agricultural region of the US.

Methods: This prospective cohort study includes 489 8^th graders in a predominantly Latinx community, with data collection every six months over two years. Among those reporting at least one romantic dating relationship (82% of cohort), adjusted relative risks (ARR) were estimated using generalized estimating equations with a Poisson distribution. Adjusted models included age, acculturation, and recruitment site.

Results: Across all years of the study, 28% of participants reported perpetrating TDV, including verbal and physical TDV, at least once. Positive conflict resolution skills (ARR: 0.74; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.56, 0.99) and family cohesion (ARR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.98) were associated with lower risk of TDV perpetration among girls, while religiosity and school-connectedness were not. Bullying victimization was associated with greater risk for TDV perpetration among girls, but not boys (ARR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.37, 2.59).

Conclusions: These findings build upon previously identified individual-level risk factors for TDV perpetration by identifying modifiable individual and interpersonal protective factors to inform TDV prevention. Findings confirm the growing body of research showing connection across multiple forms of interpersonal violence, such that prevention efforts targeting multiple outcomes (e.g., TDV and bullying) may be most efficient.