Search results

The Healthy Steps for Young Children program began in 1995 as a new approach to primary health care for young children, birth to age three. The program is intended to enhance early pediatric care by incorporating preventive developmental and behavioral services as part of a comprehensive, whole-child, whole-family model of health care and to help provide mothers and fathers with the childrearing information and guidance they seek.

The evaluation of Healthy Steps consisted of three components: the National Evaluation, the Affiliate Evaluation, and the Embedded Observational Study. All data contained in these public release data sets come from the National Evaluation. For additional information on the Affiliate Evaluation or the Embedded Observational Study, please visit http://www.jhsph.edu/WCHPC_/Projects/Healthy_Steps/index.html.

These data were gathered to assess whether the Healthy Steps program was successful in reorienting pediatric practice to emphasize child development issues in increasing parents' knowledge about early nurturing of infants and parents' involvement in their children's development and in promoting parents' practices that improve the health, safety, and health care utilization of their children.

The data are organized as follows:

• Parent Forms: Newborn

  The newborn form was used to gather data on the baby's characteristics, demographic characteristics of the mother, father, and family, prenatal utilization of services, health behaviors of the mother and father, and parents' decisions about a pediatric provider for their newborn.

• Parent Forms: 6 Month

  The 6 month form was used to gather information on selected family demographic characteristics, child's health, parenting practices, and health behaviors of the mother and father. Questions included the frequency of injuries, emergency department visits, and hospitalization in the past 6 months, use of safety devices, activities that promote learning and development, sources of information on speech development, child care arrangements, smoking practices, and mother's receipt of postpartum care.

• Parent Forms: 12 Month

  Like the 6 month form, the 12 month form was used to gather information on selected family demographic characteristics, child's health, parenting practices, and health behaviors of the mother and father. Questions included the frequency of injuries, emergency department visits, and hospitalization in the past 12 months, use of safety devices, activities that promote learning and development, sources of information on speech development, child care arrangements, smoking practices, and mother's receipt of postpartum care.

• Medical Record Abstraction: Vaccinations

  This file contains demographic and vaccination data, including gender, race/ethnicity, and insurance provider.

• Medical Record Abstraction: Medical Visits

  This file contains data abstracted from forms completed for every visit recorded in the medical record or other primary care files, including type visit and whether a physical assessment was conducted.

• Medical Record Abstraction: Referrals/Consultations

  These data are limited to information on any referrals or consultations noted in the child's medical record or other primary care files, including type of and reason for the referral.

• Medical Record Abstraction: Hospitalizations/ED Visits

  These data are limited to information on any hospitalization, emergency department visit, or urgent care visit recorded in the child's medical record or other primary care files, including the type of and reason for the visit.

• Healthy Steps Specialist Contact Logs

  Data contained in this file represent every interaction between Healthy Steps Specialists and the family, including home visits, office visits, telephone calls to or from the family, parent groups, mailings, and other types of contacts, such as hospital visits. Information collected on each contact included the date of contact, type of contact, person contacted, status of the contact, reason for the contact, whether a handout was given out or a referral made during the contact, the issues/ problems discussed during the contact, and any action taken by the Healthy Steps Specialist.

• Parent Interviews: 2-4 Month

  The 2-4 month interview included questions about the respondent's knowledge of child development, his/her sense of competence about childrearing, his/her perception of support for childrearing activities from both formal and informal sources, and his/her engagement in activities with the child that promote health, learning, and development. The interview also gathered information on the socio- demographic characteristics of the family, including the mother's and father's education, marital status, employment, income, and household composition.

• Parent Interviews: 30-33 Month

  The 30-33 month interview is the source of data on parent and child outcomes and assessed the extent to which families received the Healthy Steps intervention. Specifically, parents were asked about utilization of health-related services and about the child's health and progress in reaching age-appropriate developmental milestones, concerns the parent had about the child's development or behavior, and whether the child was referred to services for a behavior or developmentally-related problem. Additional questions addressed parenting activities that promote development, family routines, engagement in safety activities, the mother's general health status, use of substances, use of mental health services, and use of the child's doctor or her obstetrician/gynecologist as a source for discussing problems with depression and use of preventive health care.

After pediatric injury, posttraumatic stress and other emotional outcomes in children and their parents often go unrecognized and untreated. This is due in part to the challenges in identifying at-risk children and their parents in the emergency care setting. The aims of this study were to assess the extent to which nurses were able to implement a brief screener for posttraumatic stress symptoms risk within the course of normal care of injured patients, and to assess posttraumatic stress and depression symptoms in injured children (aged 8-17 years) and their parents after emergency department care, and the relationship of these symptoms to parent-reported overall recovery.

This study prospectively assessed psychological and cognitive sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in children. Multiple factors may influence children's functioning following head injury including injury severity, pre-injury child factors, and family factors. Overall study aims were to describe the relationships between these factors and children's recovery in the eighteen months following their injury, to examine the relationship between children's cognitive impairments post injury and psychological distress related to the injury event, and to examine the role of PTSD in children's recovery from TBI.

The study enrolled children age 6 to 15 admitted to hospital after an accident resulting in mild to severe TBI, and one parent per child. Children and parents completed research assessments within 2 months of the accident, and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-accident. Child health and behavior, health-related quality of life, parenting, and parent posttraumatic stress were assessed at all time points, and child posttraumatic stress symptoms were assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months.

The Social Environment and Biomarkers of Aging Study (SEBAS) in Taiwan, 2000 and 2006, provides information regarding the health and well-being of older persons in Taiwan. Taiwan has undergone rapid demographic, social, and economic changes, becoming a highly urbanized and industrial society with a growing population of persons age 65 or older. SEBAS explores the relationship between life challenges and mental and physical health, the impact of social environment on the health and well-being of the elderly, as well as biological markers of health and stress. The study collected self-reports of physical, psychological, and social well-being, plus extensive clinical data based on medical examinations and laboratory analyses. Examination of health outcomes included chronic illnesses, functional status, psychological well-being, and cognitive function. Questions regarding life challenges focused on perceived stress, economic difficulties, security and safety, and the consequences of a major earthquake. Biological markers were used to identify cardiovascular risk factors, metabolic process measures, immune-system activity, the hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal axis, and sympathetic nervous system activity. Two rounds of biomarker data collected in 2000 and 2006 were complemented by face-to-face interviews with the participants. Demographic and background variables included age, sex, education, ethnicity, occupation, and residency.

Additional information about the Social Environment and Biomarkers of Aging Study can be found at the Georgetown University Center for Populations and Health Web site.

A Webinar describing the Social Environment and Biomarkers of Aging Study (SEBAS) was presented June 20, 2016. All interested users can access the webinar here.

To access this data collection, please click on the Restricted Data button above. You will need to download and complete the data use agreement and then email it to [email protected]. The instructions are in the form.

This study was conducted at the Medical University of South Carolina over the span of one year to delineate the cause/effect relationship between neural output and the biomechanical functions being executed in walking in post-stroke patients. Kinematic, kinetic, and electromyography (EMG) data were collected from 27 post-stroke subjects and from 17 healthy control subjects. Each subject walked on a treadmill at their self-selected walking speed in addition to a randomized block design of four steady-state mobility capability tasks: walking at maximum speed, and walking at self-selected speed with maximum cadence, maximum step length, and maximum step height.

From 2004-2009, an initial follow-up of the original Midlife Development in the United States samples (MIDUS 2) was conducted with expansion of the protocol to include Neuroscience Project data collection and a sample of Black Americans from Milwaukee, WI. The MIDUS Neuroscience Project performed a second follow-up from 2017-2022 of the MIDUS Main and Milwaukee samples (MIDUS 3) on a subsample of those who completed the MIDUS 3 Survey and Biomarker Projects.

The goal was to examine indices of brain aging, function, and structure with a focus on the brain circuitry associated with individual differences in affective style, and to characterize the peripheral consequences of these central profiles for biological systems that may be relevant to health. The primary aims were to: (1) characterize individual differences in emotional reactivity, recovery, and sustaining processes using corrugator and zygomatic electromyography and eyeblink startle magnitude, (2) characterize individual differences in brain morphology and connectivity using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) (3) characterize individual differences in functional activity within the neural circuitry of emotion using task and resting state fMRI, (4) calculate brain age, and (5) test the ability of these indices to predict the comprehensive array of health, wellbeing, cognitive, psychological, social, and life challenge factors assessed in other MIDUS projects. To probe individual differences in emotional processes, psychophysiological and fMRI measures of emotional responses to the presentation of negative, positive, and neutral pictures, and these same measures during a post-picture period were examined.

Emotion-influenced memory was assessed at both the psychophysiological and imaging sessions: (1) Free recall of the presented affective pictures at the end of the psychophysiological session. (2) Memory and likeability ratings for neutral faces paired with the affective pictures in the imaging task. Finally, selected tasks from the CANTAB assessed affective biases and cognitive processes important for emotion regulation.

Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation-Strong Start (MIHOPE-Strong Start) was a large-scale evaluation that rigorously tested the effectiveness of evidence-based home visiting in improving birth and health outcomes during pregnancy and in the year after birth. Local programs included in the study's analysis implemented one of two evidence-based models: Healthy Families America (HFA) or Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP). These models were chosen because earlier evaluations found some evidence of their having positive impacts on birth outcomes.

The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) partnered with the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to sponsor the study. MIHOPE-Strong Start was part of the CMMI's Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns Initiative, which evaluated whether enhanced, nonmedical prenatal interventions, when provided in addition to routine medical care, have the potential to improve birth outcomes and reduce health care costs for women enrolled in Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Under contract with OPRE, MDRC conducted MIHOPE-Strong Start in collaboration with James Bell Associates, Johns Hopkins University, Mathematica, and New York University.

The analysis for MIHOPE-Strong Start included 2,899 women and 66 local programs (37 HFA and 29 NFP programs) operating across 17 states: California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin. Women were eligible for MIHOPE-Strong Start if they were pregnant and at least 8 weeks from their due date.

The MIHOPE-Strong Start analysis included a subset of families and local programs that were recruited for MIHOPE, the national evaluation of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program. Specifically, the MIHOPE-Strong Start impact analysis included information on 46 local home visiting programs and 1,845 families that were initially recruited for MIHOPE but met the MIHOPE-Strong Start eligibility criteria. An important distinction between MIHOPE-Strong Start and MIHOPE is that MIHOPE included only programs receiving MIECHV funding, while MIHOPE-Strong Start included both MIECHV and non-MIECHV-funded programs.

In both studies, families were randomly assigned either to an evidence-based home visiting program or to a control group who was given information on other services available in the community. The random assignment design was intended to create program and control groups that were similar when women entered the study, so that systematic differences in the outcomes of interest observed between the two groups can be attributed to the home visiting services rather than to the preexisting characteristics of the women.

Prescription for Health was an initiative funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in collaboration with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Under this initiative, primary care practice-based research networks (PBRNs) -- groups of ambulatory practices devoted principally to the primary care of patients -- developed, tested, and evaluated innovative strategies to improve the delivery and effectiveness of health behavior change services in primary care practice. The strategies targeted four health risk behaviors: tobacco use, unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, and risky alcohol use. Prescription for Health was conducted in two rounds. Round one awarded grants to 17 PBRNs to test the feasibility of implementing the strategies, while round two awarded grants to ten PBRNs to measure the strategies' effectiveness and the expenses associated with them. More than a 100 primary care practices from the ten PBRNs participated in the evaluation.

This data collection comprises the data from one of the data collection efforts carried out by the second round: the responses to the Practice Information Form (PIF), a Web-based instrument which captured key organizational attributes of the participating practices. The PIF data were collected at two time points. Baseline data were collected from each practice before the intervention was implemented and follow-up data were collected approximately one year after the start of the intervention.

Information about the practices collected by the PIF include practice type and ownership; characteristics of each clinician and non-clinician staff person; number of vacancies for clinicians and non clinicians; number of exam rooms and volume of office visits; average number of new patients per month; percentages of patients in various age, race, Hispanic origin, and payer categories; and the predominant type of payment arrangement with health plans. In addition, the PIF asked whether a specific health plan controlled over half of the practice's total business; whether the practice had a pay-for-performance program; whether any payers or organizations publicly reported practice level performance information, such as patient satisfaction, chronic care/disease management, and/or preventive service delivery; and whether practices had a formal process for routinely measuring satisfaction among patients, clinicians, and other staff. The PIF also investigated how practices motivated their clinicians and staff; the level of competition among practices in local markets; the use of computers, electronic medical record systems, and patient registries; major changes that affected each practice's ability to make improvements in patient care; factors that prevented practices from translating the results of research into changes in medical practice; and the use of health risk assessment protocols or questionnaires to identify patients who may benefit from counseling or interventions. Questions about the four Prescription for Health behaviors -- physical activity, healthy eating, smoking cessation, and addressing risky drinking -- asked how practices linked patients to outside resources for each of the four behaviors; how practices used evidence-based guidelines and informed patients about recommendations for the behaviors; and which approaches practices used to support patients ready to engage in a behavior change for each of the behaviors.

The National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) is the first population-based study of health and social factors on a national scale, aiming to understand the well-being of older, community-dwelling Americans by examining the interactions among physical health, illness, medication use, cognitive function, emotional health, sensory function, health behaviors, and social connectedness. It is designed to provide health providers, policy makers, and individuals with useful information and insights into these factors, particularly on social and intimate relationships. The National Opinion Research Center (NORC), along with Principal Investigators at the University of Chicago, conducted more than 3,000 interviews during 2005 and 2006 with a nationally representative sample of adults aged 57 to 85. Face-to-face interviews and biomeasure collection took place in respondents' homes. The following files constitute Round 1: Core Data, Marital/Cohabiting History Data, Social Networks Data, Medications Data, and Sexual Partners Data.

Included in the Core file (Datasets 1 and 2) are demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, education, race, and ethnicity. Other topics covered respondents' social networks, social and cultural activity, physical and mental health including cognition, well-being, illness, medications and alternative therapies, history of sexual and intimate partnerships and patient-physician communication, in addition to bereavement items. In addition data was collected from respondents on the following items and modules: social activity items, physical contact module, sexual interest module, get up and go assessment of physical function and a panel of biomeasures including, weight, waist circumference, height, blood pressure, smell, saliva collection, taste, and a self-administered vaginal swab for female respondents. The Core file also contains a count of the total number of drugs taken, and a variable for each observed therapeutic category, indicating whether the respondent reported taking one or more medications in that category. These variables are derived from the information in the medications file, and thus are guaranteed to be consistent with it. The Marital/Cohabiting History file (Dataset 3) contains one record for each marriage or cohabitation identified in Section 3A of the questionnaire. The Social Networks file (Datasets 4 and 5) contains one record for each person identified on the network roster. Respondents who refused to participate in the roster or who did not identify anyone are not represented in this file. The Medications file (Dataset 6) contains one record for each item listed in the medications log (including alternative medicines and nutritional products). Respondents who did not report taking any medications or who refused to participate in this module are not represented in this file. Lastly, the Sexual Partners file (Dataset 7) contains one record for each sexual partner identified in Section 3A of the questionnaire.

NACDA also maintains a Colectica portal with the NSHAP Core data across rounds 1-3, which allows users to interact with variables across rounds and create customized subsets. Registration is required.

In 2010, the United States Congress authorized the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program, which started a major expansion of evidence-based home visiting programs for families living in at-risk communities. MIECHV is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) in collaboration with the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The authorizing legislation required an evaluation of the program, which became the Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation (MIHOPE). The evaluation is being conducted for HHS by MDRC with James Bell Associates, Johns Hopkins University, Mathematica, the University of Georgia, and Columbia University.

MIHOPE was designed to learn whether families benefit from MIECHV-funded early childhood home visiting programs, and if so, how. The study included the four evidence-based models that 10 or more states chose in their initial MIECHV plans in fiscal year 2010-2011: Early Head Start - Home-based option, Healthy Families America, Nurse-Family Partnership, and Parents as Teachers. MIHOPE was the first study to include all of these four evidence-based models.

To provide rigorous evidence on the MIECHV-funded programs' effects, the study randomly assigned more than 4,200 families to receive either MIECHV-funded home visiting or information on community services. As is the standard method in studies that use random assignment, the primary analytical strategy in MIHOPE was to compare the outcomes of the entire program group with those of the entire control group.

As per the authorizing legislation, the study measured early effects on family and child outcomes in the areas listed below, with the exception of school readiness and academic achievement (which were not included at this point because children were too young to measure those outcomes):

• Prenatal, maternal, and newborn health
• Child health and development, including child maltreatment
• Parenting skills
• School readiness and child academic achievement
• Crime and domestic violence
• Family economic self-sufficiency
• Referrals and service coordination

Videos and Video Metadata: Two sets of videos are included in the MIHOPE restricted access files. They include:

• Mother-home visitor interactions at 387 home visits and
• Interactions between child and mother using the "Three Bags" and "Clean-Up" tasks with 2,832 families.

The mother-home visitor interaction videos were recorded only for treatment group families at two points in time: the first was, on average, about eight weeks after the family's first home visit and the second was about eight months after the family's first home visit. Overall, 264 families are included in the mother-home visitor interaction videos in total, with 123 of these families recorded at both points in time.

The mother-child interaction videos, during which the child and mother play with toys contained in three bags and place the toys back in the bags (the "Three Bags" and "Clean-Up" tasks), were recorded when the 15-month in-home assessments were conducted and are available for 2,832 families in the treatment and control groups.

The videos are only linkable to a few pieces of metadata (home visiting model, video ID, treatment status, and variables indicating whether the family appears in the home visit videos, the three-bag task videos, or both). The videos in the restricted access data are not linkable to any other data included in the restricted access files. Additionally, the videos may only be viewed at the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research's on-site Physical Data Enclave in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

The National Social Life, Health and Aging Project (NSHAP) is the first population-based study of health and social factors on a national scale, aiming to understand the well-being of older, community-dwelling Americans by examining the interactions among physical health, illness, medication use, cognitive function, emotional health, sensory function, health behaviors, and social connectedness. It is designed to provide health providers, policy makers, and individuals with useful information and insights into these factors, particularly on social and intimate relationships.

The National Opinion Research Center (NORC), along with Principal Investigators at the University of Chicago, conducted more than 3,000 interviews during 2005 and 2006 with a nationally representative sample of adults aged 57 to 85. Face-to-face interviews and biomeasure collection took place in respondents' homes. Round 2 interviews were conducted from August 2010 through May 2011, during which Round 1 Respondents were re-interviewed. An attempt was also made to interview individuals who were sampled in Round 1 but declined to participate. In addition, spouses or co-resident partners were also interviewed using the same instruments as the main respondents. This process resulted in 3,377 total respondents. The following files constitute Round 2: Core Data, Disposition of Round 1 Partner Data, Social Networks Data, Social Networks Update Data, Partner History Data, Partner History Update Data, Medications Data, Proxy Data, and Sleep Statistics Data.

Included in the Core files (Datasets 1 and 2) are demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, education, race, and ethnicity. Other topics covered respondents' social networks, social and cultural activity, physical and mental health including cognition, well-being, illness, history of sexual and intimate partnerships, and patient-physician communication, in addition to bereavement items. Data were also collected from respondents on the following items and modules: social activity items, physical contact module, sexual interest module, get up and go assessment of physical function, and a panel of biomeasures, including weight, waist circumference, height, blood pressure, smell, saliva collection, and taste.

The Disposition of Round 1 Partner files (Datasets 3 and 4) detail information derived from Section 6A items regarding the partner from Round 1 within the questionnaire. This provides a complete history for respondent partners across both rounds.

The Social Networks files (Datasets 5 and 6) contain one record for each person identified on the network roster. Respondents who refused to participate in the roster or who did not identify anyone are not represented in this file.

The Social Networks Update files (Datasets 7 and 8) detail respondents' current relationship status with each person identified on the network roster.

The Partner History file (Dataset 9) contains one record for each marriage, cohabitation, or romantic relationship identified in Section 6A of the questionnaire, including a current partner in Round 2 but excluding the partner from Round 1.

The Partner History Update file (Dataset 10) details respondents' current sexual partner information, as well as marital and cohabiting status.

The Medications Data file (Dataset 11) contains records for items listed in the medications log.

The Proxy Data files (Datasets 12 and 13) contain information from proxy interviews administered for Round 1 Respondents who were either deceased or whose health was too poor to participate in Round 2.

The Sleep Statistics Data files (Dataset 14 and 15) provide information on actigraphy sleep variables.

NACDA also maintains a Colectica portal with the NSHAP Core data across rounds 1-3, which allows users to interact with variables across rounds and create customized subsets. Registration is required.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP).

The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582).

NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards.

Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP).

The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582).

NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards.

Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP).

The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582).

NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards.

Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP).

The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582).

NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards.

Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP).

The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582).

NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards.

Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.