Search results

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study sought to apply current and advanced Y-STR DNA technology in forensic laboratories to a large in vivo population of proxy-couples, to provide groundwork for future inquiry about the conditions affecting DNA recovery in the living patient, to determine timing for evidence collection, and to attempt to identify variables influencing DNA recovery. The objective of this research was to create the evidence base supporting or limiting the expansion of the 72-hour period for evidence collection. Another objective was to identify conditions that might influence the recovery of DNA, and therefore influence policies related to sample collection from the complex post-coital environment.

The collection includes 6 SPSS data files:

1. AlleleRecovery Jun 2014 Allrec.sav (n=70; 34 variables)
2. AlleleRecovery Jun 2014 Used for descriptve analysis.sav (n=66; 58 variables)
3. Condom_collections-baseline-d9-Jun2014 Allrec without open-ended-ICPSR.sav (n=70; 66 variables)
4. DNADemogFemalesJun2014- without open-ended AllRec-ICPSR.sav (n=73; 67 variables)
5. DNADemogFemalesJun2014- without open-ended -For analysis with group variables-ICPSR.sav (n=66; 73 variables)
6. DNADemogMalesJun2014- without open-ended AllRec-ICPSR.sav (n=73; 46 variables)

Data from a focus group of subject matter experts which convened to identify themes from their practice are not included with this collection.

Introduction and Background. Minorities are less likely to report rapes. The Post Coital DNA Recovery (PCDR) study (2009-14) subjects were white (93%) where expanded collection times were not generalizable to minority populations. Evidence reports health and medical differences between races necessitating duplication of previous research in minority populations.

Aims. (1) What is the time period in which it is possible to collect post-coital DNA in minority women using Y-STR laboratory methods? and (2) when compared to the former study sample of minority and non-minority, what are the physiological conditions, factors, or activities in minority couples that influence post-coital DNA recovery?

Design. The design includes mixed methods duplication perfected in the first study, embracing descriptive and inferential techniques. Qualitative research used semi-structured interviews. Aim 1 analysis used PCDR-M data only. Aim 2 combined data from both PCDR and PCDR-M studies. Combined, DNA recovery, a binary outcome accounting for repeated methods in population regression analysis, used Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) methods.

Fidelity. The strict criteria for adherence included considerable outreach and support of study personnel. PCDR and PCDR-M data combined and compared the two samples, which had specific homogeneity, including same inclusion and elimination criteria in both studies; fidelity to the validated protocol; laboratory method and interpretation for inclusion; duplicate statistical analysis; and interpretation of data. Any variation in key variables met elimination criteria.

Assumptions and Limitations. Assumptions included (1) motivation is altruistic; (2) motivation is incentives and coercion for some; (3) negotiating coitus is difficult and stressful; and (4) similar fidelity and dropout rates. The limitations included (1) a lack of representation for the diverse experiences of rape victims; (2) sample size; (3) self-selection bias; (4) protocol adherence; and (4) advances in laboratory science and DNA kits.

Demographics. Demographic variables included gender, race, and age. Major categories in the dataset included participants' reproductive history, data on female participants' reproductive organs, and childhood abuse.

This project was an investigation into the natural course of service needs, use, and trajectories among high-risk youth and young adults with drug use who presented to an inner-city Emergency Department with multiple risk behaviors (with and without acute violent injury). Eligible participants included youth/young adults (ages 14-24) who sought care at the Hurley Medical Center (HMC) Emergency Department (ED) located in Flint, Michigan between December 19, 2009 and September 7, 2011. Consenting youth completed a self-administered computerized screening survey. All participants who self-reported past year drug use were recruited for the longitudinal study. For a comparison group, a randomly selected sample of drug using youth seeking ED care for other reasons (e.g. abdominal pain, motor vehicle crash) were selected for longitudinal study (equilibrated monthly proportionally for age/gender with the acute violent injury group). Participants in the violent injury and comparison group completed a baseline assessment during their ED visit.

Dataset 1 (DS1) contains the Baseline Screener Data of both young adults and youth. This data file has 1,448 cases and 314 variables. Each case represents an individual seeking treatment in the emergency department.

Dataset 2 (DS2) contains the Baseline Youth Data. This data file has 89 cases and 531 variables. Of these 89 cases, 51 of the youths (ages 14-17) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 38 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

Dataset 3 (DS3) contains the Baseline Young Adult Data. This file contains 511 cases and 483 variables. Of these 511 cases, 299 of the young adults (ages 18-24) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 212 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

The Baseline Screener Data includes demographics and information about public assistance, income, work, marital status, insurance, the injury visit, school/grades, retaliation attitudes, fights, violence, gang affiliation, weapons, partner violence, nicotine use, alcohol use, drug use, HIV risk-taking behaviors, needle use, sexual behavior, STD/HIV, past adolescent injuries, age on onset of drug use, and current conflict and aggression.

The Baseline Youth and Young Adult Data include sexual behavior, threat of retaliation, brief symptom inventory/suicide risk, drug and alcohol refusal efficacy, drinking and driving (DUI), community involvement, peer influences, non-partner aggression, parental support, parent influence on drug and alcohol use, family conflict, mentors, fight self-efficacy, community violence, sexual risk behaviors, medical care, alcohol dependence/abuse, drug dependence/abuse, substance abuse service utilization, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), conduct disorder (youth) or antisocial personality disorder (young adult), legal system involvement, major depressive episodes, and mental health service utilization.