8 ms·

It amazes me that we don't have better data on something like this.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ch4s3 10y ago
It's really crazy how many open questions there are around this data. On another note, the competing explanations are interesting. I just moved out of Baltimore recently, and remember a number of high profile targeted shootings. Recently some friends of mine were in a cafe in the arts district, and a man walked in and shot someone sitting at a table six times, then fled the scene. No one else was shot. It seems this kind of crime is prevalent there, but the data are scant and poorly reported.
- throwanem 10y ago
  Got a link? I live a little way from there, but don't remember hearing about that one, and now I'm all curious.
  - ch4s3 10y ago
    There are a few companies and products: ACR Select- radiology focused: https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Select https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria/... Zynx Health - order set based: http://www.zynxhealth.com/ http://www.zynxhealth.com/ Ken Kawamoto - academic working on CDS: http://medicine.utah.edu/faculty/mddetail.php?facultyID=u0770443 http://medicine.utah.edu/faculty/mddetail.php?facultyID=u077... Avhana Health - point of care and patient specific: http://www.avhana.com/ http://www.avhana.com/ And there are a few others as well as systems built into some EHRs (electronic health records)
    - ch4s3 10y ago
      oops, meant to post this in another thread and can't delete it now
  - ch4s3 10y ago
    Here's a link http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-red-emmas-shooting-20170203-story.html http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-red...
- gozur88 10y ago
  "Targeted shooting"? That's a no-shit assassination. All it needs is Chow Yun Fat and some sunglasses.
  - ch4s3 10y ago
    Well, assassinations are usually political or for payment... so maybe? But probably just personal in this case.
ashark 10y ago
The NRA and NRA-backed politicians tend to fight even researching gun deaths, let alone trying to do anything about them. If you know that, then any gap in our knowledge about gun violence stops being surprising. http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-research-2013-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-re...
- geaserg34234 10y ago
  I haven't seen any evidence that the NRA has fought research. They have taken a stand against the CDC advocating for gun-control policies, not performing gun-violence research. The CDC has simply refused to do this research since being banned from advocating for specific policy. The CDC is not banned from performing gun-violence research, and has even conducted such research at the specific behest of Obama. The conclusions of this research actually largely vindicated a lot of the points made by the pro-gun community.
  - differentView 10y ago
    From the article: >In 1996, Republican Rep. Jay Dickey removed $2.6 million from the CDC budget — the precise amount the CDC spent on gun research in 1995 — at a time when the center was conducting more studies into gun-related deaths as a "public health phenomenon," according to The New York Times. The NRA and some pro-gun Congressmen perceived this as more of an attack.
    - geaserg34234 10y ago
      That funding cut of $2.6M was restored afterwards.
      - Retric 10y ago
        It is evidence that NRA has fought research which is what you asked. Thus you have now seen evidence even if you don't agree with the conclusion.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

ch4s3 10y ago

It's really crazy how many open questions there are around this data. On another note, the competing explanations are interesting. I just moved out of Baltimore recently, and remember a number of high profile targeted shootings. Recently some friends of mine were in a cafe in the arts district, and a man walked in and shot someone sitting at a table six times, then fled the scene. No one else was shot. It seems this kind of crime is prevalent there, but the data are scant and poorly reported.

throwanem 10y ago
Got a link? I live a little way from there, but don't remember hearing about that one, and now I'm all curious.
- ch4s3 10y ago
  There are a few companies and products: ACR Select- radiology focused: https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Select https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria/... Zynx Health - order set based: http://www.zynxhealth.com/ http://www.zynxhealth.com/ Ken Kawamoto - academic working on CDS: http://medicine.utah.edu/faculty/mddetail.php?facultyID=u0770443 http://medicine.utah.edu/faculty/mddetail.php?facultyID=u077... Avhana Health - point of care and patient specific: http://www.avhana.com/ http://www.avhana.com/ And there are a few others as well as systems built into some EHRs (electronic health records)
  - ch4s3 10y ago
    oops, meant to post this in another thread and can't delete it now
- ch4s3 10y ago
  Here's a link http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-red-emmas-shooting-20170203-story.html http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-red...
gozur88 10y ago
"Targeted shooting"? That's a no-shit assassination. All it needs is Chow Yun Fat and some sunglasses.
- ch4s3 10y ago
  Well, assassinations are usually political or for payment... so maybe? But probably just personal in this case.

ashark 10y ago

The NRA and NRA-backed politicians tend to fight even researching gun deaths, let alone trying to do anything about them. If you know that, then any gap in our knowledge about gun violence stops being surprising. http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-research-2013-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-nra-kills-gun-violence-re...

geaserg34234 10y ago
I haven't seen any evidence that the NRA has fought research. They have taken a stand against the CDC advocating for gun-control policies, not performing gun-violence research. The CDC has simply refused to do this research since being banned from advocating for specific policy. The CDC is not banned from performing gun-violence research, and has even conducted such research at the specific behest of Obama. The conclusions of this research actually largely vindicated a lot of the points made by the pro-gun community.
- differentView 10y ago
  From the article: >In 1996, Republican Rep. Jay Dickey removed $2.6 million from the CDC budget — the precise amount the CDC spent on gun research in 1995 — at a time when the center was conducting more studies into gun-related deaths as a "public health phenomenon," according to The New York Times. The NRA and some pro-gun Congressmen perceived this as more of an attack.
  - geaserg34234 10y ago
    That funding cut of $2.6M was restored afterwards.
    - Retric 10y ago
      It is evidence that NRA has fought research which is what you asked. Thus you have now seen evidence even if you don't agree with the conclusion.