Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper makes a small but meaningful contribution to the literature on the responses to community violence. My only (very minor) comment is that the authors should not be citing an undergraduate research methods textbook (Babbie) to support a methodological decision. Instead, they should be citing a more direct source.

Author Response

We appreciate the Reviewers examination of the references and critique of this source. We have reviewed and found a reference that uses a more direct source (Hutchinson & Sutherland, 2019). That has been included in the text.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Page 1/11

 

Suggest the title should be “Exploring responses to community violence though the ‘Neighborhood Trauma Team Network” since the study involves just one city.

 

Line 21

The definition of community violence is very simplistic and thus minimizes the theoretical perspective used to guide the study.  Take a look at the  Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) website:  https://bja.ojp.gov/program/community-violence-intervention/overview or the WHO definition at https://www.emro.who.int/health-topics/violence/index.html

 

Line 29

Suggest updating the WHO reference.

 

Line 31

Suggest reviewing American Medical Association document for clarity about the public health approach: https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/history-violence-public-health-problem/2009-02#:~:text=By%201993%2C%20numerous%20violence%2Dprevention,tried%20across%20the%20United%20States.

 

Page 2/11

Line 47

Suggest change operations to “process” because this is essentially a process evaluation and not a program evaluation.

Line 54

Spelling error

 

Line 59

This sentence needs to be re-worked. A Google search shows 203,000,000 responses to the keywords “victim and community needs in violence prevention.”

 

Line 58

This section could benefit from a systematic review chart of these programs in order to better set up section 1.2 on Page 3/11. The reader would be able to visually assess the significant components.

 

Page 3/11

 

Line 36

Suggest clarifying this sentence. Are you saying a benefit of PFA is that non-clinicians who are volunteers can be taught this method and use it effectively? Probably only clinicians care about the difference between a therapeutic intervention and clinical treatment.

 

Page 5/11

Line 113

The theoretical framework needs to be restructured. First the explanation of the theory is insufficient, there is no mention of a major theorist, and the use of the theory for the “four key spheres of influence” indicates a lack of understanding about the theory. Additionally, one of the major critiques of Bronfronbrenner is that he revised the theory many times and it is difficult to figure out which version of the theory researchers are using. Suggest spending more time explicating how community violence is part of this theory.

 

Page 6/11

Line 261

This is where the writer should indicate this is a process evaluation which is very different from a program evaluation to make it clear to the reader that the program was not evaluated but the process was evaluated.

 

Line 294

Suggest dropping the discussion about alignment of program documents.

 

Line 302

Suggest changing “beef” to conflict

 

7/11

Line 311

Instead of a narrative, suggest the actual logic model as an appendix so the reader could have more information about the context and do the “if-then” calculus.

9/11

Line 439

This paragraph is not helpful. A theory of change best fits in with the theory discussion. It should be in the theoretical perspective section.

 

General comments:

 

It is clear that this work is the product a criminal justice perspective which does not incorporate systemic issues and understands the world in terms of offenders and non-offenders. It is no surprise that a program developed under this way of thinking does not acknowledge that offenders are also a part of the community and are sometimes “signals” about larger issues such as structural racism. Bronfronbrenner’s theory has the power to accommodate the influence of systems but that requires a thorough understanding of how systems impact community, neighborhood, and individual life.    

 

 

Author Response

Please see attached Word document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The addition of more theoretical background is helpful to the reader.