Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Injury control training in the USA: meeting the challenge
  1. Mariana Garrettson1,
  2. Carol W Runyan2,
  3. Melissa Schiff3,
  4. Marizen Ramirez4
  1. 1Injury Prevention Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
  2. 2Department of Epidemiology, University of Colorado- Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
  3. 3School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  4. 4Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
  1. Correspondence to Mariana Garrettson, Injury Prevention Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Bank of America Bldg Suite 500, 137 E. Franklin St, CB 7505, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7505, USA; marianag{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Creating a strong future for injury control in the USA requires adequate support for research, improved advocacy for injury control legislation and regulation, and effective translation of research into practice. Yet, none of these priorities can be pursued without a qualified injury prevention workforce. Scientific advancement in any field requires well-trained scholars who can apply rigorous methods to understand phenomena and develop innovative solutions to problems.

It is unthinkable for a school of public health to graduate students with no exposure to issues of chronic disease or infectious disease, yet most schools offer limited, if any, exposure to injury—the leading cause of death for Americans ages 1–44. As documented by the Association of Schools of Public Health inventory in 2002, there were 35 courses that focused primarily on injury and violence prevention in the 33 accredited schools of public health.1 There were three injury-related doctoral programmes that required an injury course, but no masters programme that had any requirement of an injury …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.