Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Apr 30;15(4):e0232252. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232252

Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US

Julia Raifman 1,*, Laura Sampson 2, Sandro Galea 3
Editor: Kyoung-Sae Na4
PMCID: PMC7192495  PMID: 32353022

Abstract

Introduction and objective

The United States (US) has the highest rate of firearm suicides in the world. The US and Canada are comparable countries with markedly different rates of firearm ownership, providing an opportunity to estimate suicide fatalities that could be averted in the US with a lower rate of firearm ownership.

Methods

We compared 2016 US suicide fatality rates–standardized within fourteen sex-specific age groups to reflect the ethnic composition of Canada–to 2016 Canadian suicide rates. We then calculated the number and proportion of suicides that could be averted in the US if the US had the same rates of suicide as in Canada.

Results

If the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, we estimate there would be approximately 25.9% fewer US suicide fatalities, equivalent to 11,630 suicide fatalities averted each year. This decline would be driven by a 79.3% lower rate of firearm-specific suicide fatalities. The male suicide fatality rate would be 28.8% lower and equivalent to 9,992 fewer suicide fatalities each year. The female suicide fatality rate would be 16.0% lower and equivalent to 1,638 fewer suicide fatalities each year. While 36% of firearm suicide fatalities could be replaced by non-firearm suicide fatalities, 64% of firearm fatalities could be averted entirely.

Conclusions

US policymakers may wish to consider policies that would reduce rates of firearm ownership, given that that about 26% of US suicide fatalities might be averted if the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, a country with drastically lower firearm ownership rates.

Introduction

Nearly 45,000 people died due to suicide in the United States (US) in 2016 [1], a rate that increased in 2017 and contributed to a general decline in US life expectancy [2]. Of US suicides, 51% were due to firearms. The US has the highest rate of firearm suicides in the world, with 35% of global firearm suicide fatalities but among just 4% of the world’s population [3].

With an estimated 120.5 firearms per 100 people, US civilian firearm ownership per person is greater than that of any other country by more than twofold and accounts for 46% of global civilian firearm ownership [4]. Firearms are a particularly lethal means of suicide [5], and firearm ownership is linked to likelihood of suicide fatalities. In one US study, each one percent increase in state household firearm ownership over time was associated with 0.22 more suicide fatalities per 100,000 adults [6]. In another US study, between 1981 and 2002, each 10% reduction in regional household firearm ownership over time was associated with a 2.5% reduction in suicide fatalities [7]. These data, coupled with the unusually high rate of firearm suicides in the US, suggest that the high prevalence of firearms in the US may drive the high rate of suicide fatalities.

Removal of a particularly lethal means of suicide has reduced suicide rates in other settings. In the United Kingdom, breathing coal gas containing toxic carbon monoxide from ovens was the leading method of suicide until the 1960s, when the gas supply transitioned to natural gas. Eliminating coal gas as a readily accessible means of suicide was associated with reductions in coal gas related suicide fatalities of 80% among males and 87% among females, and reductions in overall suicide fatalities of 34% among males and 32% among females [8]. Similarly, bans of a highly fatal herbicide commonly used as a method of suicide in South Korea were associated with a 46% reduction in suicides due to herbicides or fungicides and a 10% reduction in overall suicide fatalities [9]. Similar reductions in suicide were observed with pesticide bans in Sri Lanka [10]. While there was some replacement of restricted means with alternate means of suicide in these areas, means restriction of common methods of suicide fatalities was linked to fewer overall suicide fatalities in each setting.

Other studies suggest there have been similar reductions in all-cause suicide fatalities after countries have changed federal policies to reduce firearm ownership or access. After Israel restricted weekend access to firearms for Israeli Defense Force soldiers, the suicide rate declined by 40% [11]. After Australia banned long guns and implemented a gun buyback program beginning in 1996, trends in all-cause suicide mortality reversed from increasing 1% percent per year to declining by 1.5% per year [12]. Finally, after Austria made handgun purchase policies more stringent in 1998, there was a decline in the suicide rate due to firearms, but not in the all-cause suicide rate [13].

These examples raise an important question: would the US witness fewer suicide fatalities if fewer firearms were available?

Evaluating how lower firearm ownership would affect US suicide fatalities is not straightforward. To do so, we need to estimate suicide fatality rates in a context with different levels of firearm ownership. While there is variation in firearm ownership across US states, those states that are most educated, wealthy, and likely to vote democratic tend to have the most firearm regulation and the fewest firearms [14]. The observable differences between states means there are likely unmeasured ways in which the states differ as well, making it difficult to determine whether lower firearm ownership or differences in other characteristics drive lower suicide fatality rates.

A better approach to answering this question is afforded by comparing the US to Canada. Canada is comparable to the US in demographic and macroeconomic characteristics, and is commonly used as a point of comparison for the US [1518]. The US and Canada are both democracies and among the top 20 countries in the world with regard to gross domestic product (GDP) per capita [19]. Eighty-nine percent of the US population and 87% of the Canadian population have a high school diploma, and 21% of the US population and 17% of the Canadian population have a university degree [20,21]. Fifty-three percent of the US population and 46% of the Canadian population are married [22,23]. Approximately 82% of the US population and 81% of the Canadian population live in urban areas; and the US unemployment rate is 4.9%, while the Canadian unemployment rate is 7.0%.

While similar in these respects, the US and Canada diverge in two important respects relevant to the question at hand.

First, the two countries differ markedly in firearm ownership. Federal firearm restrictions have made Canadian firearm ownership much lower than in the US across localities with varying incomes, educational attainment, and political views. The overall estimated firearm ownership rate is 120.5 firearms per 100 people in the US [4], in contrast to 34.7 firearms per 100 people in Canada. Canada restricts widespread access to firearms principally by requiring individuals to have a license to possess a firearm, a process that takes up to 45 days [24].

Second, key demographic groups that have distinct patterns of suicide–Black and Native populations–make up different proportions of the US and Canadian populations. Black populations typically have lower suicide fatality rates in the US [25], and a greater proportion of the US compared to the Canadian population is Black. Native populations have elevated suicide fatality rates [26], and a lesser proportion of the US population is Native relative to the Canadian population.

To estimate US suicide fatalities in a context of fewer firearms, we compared all-cause and firearm-specific US suicide fatality rates to Canadian suicide fatality rates while accounting for demographic differences, standardizing suicide fatality data in the two countries by ethnicity.

Materials and methods

Data and variables

Statistics Canada [27] provides data on the age group, sex, and method of suicide of individuals who die by suicide, but does not provide information on ethnicity of decedents within these demographic groups. The US provides more detailed data, including the age, sex, and ethnicity of those who die by suicide, along with the cause of suicide (firearm vs. non-firearm). To standardize the US data for comparison to Canada, we estimated the ethnic composition of the Canadian population and adjusted US suicide data to represent fatality rates that would be observed if the US population had the same ethnic composition as the Canadian population (henceforth referred to as the “US standardized population), as detailed below.

We obtained data on Canadian suicide fatalities from Statistics Canada through the Government of Canada Open Data website. We extracted age group- and sex-specific 2016 fatality data on firearm and non-firearm suicide from the “Deaths, by cause, Chapter XX: External causes of morbidity and mortality (V01 to Y89)” dataset [28]. We considered suicide fatalities with the following codes to be firearm-specific suicide fatalities: Intentional self-harm by handgun discharge; intentional self-harm by rifle, shotgun and larger firearm; and intentional self-harm by other and unspecified firearm discharge. We calculated non-firearm suicide fatalities by subtracting firearm-specific suicide fatalities from the total fatalities due to “intentional self-harm,” within each age and sex group. We obtained data on the overall population in each sex-specific age group from the 2016 Canadian Census through Statistics Canada [29].

We obtained data to approximate the ethnic composition of the Canadian population by sex-specific age groups from two tables: Table (A) listed single and multiple ethnicity responses grouped by categories of Aboriginal (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit) vs. non-Aboriginal origins [30] and Table (B) listed single and multiple ethnicity responses by reported continent and country of origin [31]. These tables did not provide information on the specific combination of ethnicities of individuals who reported multiple ethnicities, so we created three mutually exclusive categories. Within each sex-specific age group, we first calculated the number of individuals reporting any Aboriginal ancestries by adding Table (A) data on reports of “Aboriginal ancestry (only)” and “Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal ancestries.” We then calculated the number of Canadians in each sex-specific age group who reported “African origins” based on the Table (B) data. Finally, we estimated the number of non-Aboriginal, non-African individuals by subtracting the African and Aboriginal numbers from the total number of individuals in each sex-specific age group. We determined the age groups for the full analysis based on the age groups for which Statistics Canada provided data on ethnicity. We used these data to approximately align Canadian data with three ethnicity groups in the US data: Native American, Black, and White or Asian.

We obtained data on US firearm and non-firearm suicide counts, population denominators, and crude suicide fatality rates by age group, sex, and ethnicity from the Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [1]. WISQARS reported that there were three suicide fatalities among individuals of unknown age group, which were excluded from the analysis. To standardize death rates using Canadian ethnic distributions within each sex-specific age group, we approximated Canadian ethnicity groups using US ethnicity data provided in WISQARS. For both firearm and non-firearm suicide fatalities in each sex-specific age group, we aligned the “Black” category in the US data with the “African origins” category in the Canadian data. We aligned the “American Indian/Alaska Native” data from the US with the “Aboriginal” category in the Canadian data. Finally, we aligned the “White” and “Asian or Pacific Islander” groups in the US data to approximate the “non-Aboriginal, non-African” group from the Canadian data.

Statistical analysis

For each sex-specific age group in the US, we created a standardized US population matching the ethnic composition of the Canadian population. To estimate suicide fatality rates in the standardized US population, we summed US ethnicity-specific estimates of firearm and non-firearm suicide fatalities, multiplied by the proportion of the Canadian population of a given ethnicity. We then multiplied the estimated rates by 100,000 to provide the suicide rate per 100,000 individuals. Each step of the standardization is described in additional detail in the (S1 Text and S1S7 Tables).

We calculated all-cause and cause-specific suicide fatality rates per 100,000 people in Canada by dividing the number of suicide fatalities in each sex-specific age group by the population in each group and multiplying this rate by 100,000. We created a bar graph depicting the US standardized suicide fatality rates and Canadian suicide fatality rates for each sex-specific age group. We calculated 95% confidence intervals for the total suicide fatality rates using the normal approximation for the Poisson distribution [32,33], as is standard for rates, depicted as error bars in the figure.

For each sex-specific age group, we calculated rate differences by subtracting the Canadian suicide rates from the US standardized suicide rates for all suicides and firearm-specific and non-firearm-specific suicides. We then divided this difference by the US standardized suicide fatality rate to estimate the proportion of suicide fatalities that would be averted if the US had the same suicide rate as in Canada, for each sex-specific age group. Finally, we multiplied this proportion by the actual number of US suicide fatalities in each sex-specific age group, to estimate the fatalities that could be averted. We summed the fatalities averted in each sex-specific age group to estimate the total potential fatalities averted by sex and in total for overall and cause-specific suicide fatalities, calculating additional fatalities rather than fatalities averted for non-firearm suicides. This analysis is described in detail with an example in the (S1 Text and S1S7 Tables). We also estimated the proportion of firearm suicide fatalities for which there would be means replacement by subtracting the total fatalities averted from the firearm fatalities averted and dividing by firearm fatalities averted.

Results

Table 1 shows the characteristics of the US and Canadian population in 2016. There were 35,151,740 individuals included in the Canadian Census vital statistics data (used for denominators for suicide rates); 34,460,060 individuals included in ethnicity tables from the Canadian Census (used for weighting); and 323,127,513 individuals in the US WISQARS data in 2016. Approximately 91% of Canadian males and females and 85% of US males and 84% of US females were non-Aboriginal and non-African, or White and Asian. Approximately 14% of US males and females and three percent of Canadian males and females were Black or of African origins, while six percent of Canadian males and females and 1.4–1.5% of US males and females were Aboriginal or American Indian/Alaska Native.

Table 1. Population characteristics in the United States and Canada, 2016.

Age Group Sex Ethnicity Canada United States
N Percent N Percent
0 to 14 Male Aboriginal 287,470 9.6 585,881 1.9
African origins 161,155 5.4 5,196,385 16.7
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,532,520 85.0 25,353,242 81.4
Female Aboriginal 276,295 9.7 570,162 1.9
African origins 154,980 5.5 50,27,401 16.8
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,404,625 84.8 24,241,998 81.2
15 to 24 Male Aboriginal 172,120 7.9 389,861 1.7
African origins 84,150 3.9 36,88,506 16.5
Non-aboriginal, non-African 1,914,130 88.2 18,214,544 81.7
Female Aboriginal 172,400 8.4 374,352 1.8
African origins 81,380 3.9 3,560,736 16.8
Non-aboriginal, non-African 1,807,545 87.7 17,283,028 81.5
25 to 34 Male Aboriginal 142,035 6.3 374,596 1.7
African origins 79,000 3.5 3,338,882 14.8
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,043,930 90.2 18,886,260 83.6
Female Aboriginal 166,515 7.2 346,167 1.6
African origins 89,020 3.9 3,466,922 15.7
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,056,075 88.9 18,264,416 82.7
35 to 44 Male Aboriginal 125,615 5.7 309,569 1.5
African origins 85,310 3.9 2,702,577 13.4
Non-aboriginal, non-African 1,984,145 90.4 17,140,617 85.1
Female Aboriginal 148,225 6.4 297,098 1.5
African origins 87,705 3.8 3,017,848 14.9
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,076,770 89.8 17,002,447 83.7
45 to 54 Male Aboriginal 128,220 5.2 277,098 1.3
African origins 68,065 2.8 2,666,665 12.6
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,246,375 92.0 18,162,376 86.1
Female Aboriginal 145,745 5.7 277,646 1.3
African origins 60,115 2.4 3,018,481 13.9
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,343,455 91.9 18,384,413 84.8
55 to 64 Male Aboriginal 101,825 4.3 216,738 1.1
African origins 36,965 1.6 2,284,809 11.4
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,227,070 94.1 17,497,491 87.5
Female Aboriginal 114,835 4.6 235,033 1.1
African origins 30,300 1.2 2,712,845 12.6
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,344,065 94.2 18,516,228 86.3
65+ Male Aboriginal 69,390 2.7 169,296 0.8
African origins 25,160 1.0 1,866,064 8.6
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,56,930 96.3 19,757,466 90.7
Female Aboriginal 79,835 2.7 206,658 0.8
African origins 24,625 0.8 2,758,899 10.1
Non-aboriginal, non-African 2,823,970 96.4 24,485,812 89.2
Total Male Aboriginal 1,026,675 6.0 2,323,039 1.5
African origins 539,805 3.2 21,743,888 13.7
Non-aboriginal, non-African 15,405,100 90.8 135,011,996 84.9
Female Aboriginal 1,103,850 6.3 2,307,116 1.4
African origins 528,125 3.0 23,563,132 14.4
Non-aboriginal, non-African 15,856,505 90.7 138,178,342 84.2
Total 34,460,060 323,127,513

We used the Canadian descriptions of ethnicity in the table. “Aboriginal” corresponded to “American Indian/Alaska Native;” “African” corresponded to “Black;” and “Non-aboriginal, non-African” corresponded to “White” and “Asian” in the US data. The Canadian census only inquired about the ethnicity of individuals living in private residences, so the total is lower than the total population.

Fig 1 shows the suicide fatality rate per 100,000 people by age group in 2016 in Canada relative to the US population standardized to the ethnic characteristics of Canada, with part (a) depicting rates for males and part (b) depicting rates for females.

Fig 1. Cause-specific suicide fatality rates in the US and Canada, by sex and age group.

Fig 1

Notes: The US population is the US standardized population, reflecting the demographic characteristics of the Canadian population.

Relative to Canada, the male suicide fatality rate in the US standardized population was greater in every age group. The proportion of male suicide fatalities due to firearms in the US standardized population ranged from 46% among those aged 25 to 34 to 78% among those aged 65 or older. In contrast, the proportion of male suicide fatalities due to firearms in Canada ranged from six percent among those under the age of 15 years to 32% among those aged 65 or older. We estimated that if males in the US had the same firearm suicide fatality rate as Canada, we would observe 76.9% fewer suicide fatalities due to firearms and 32.8% more non-firearm suicide fatalities. The overall male suicide fatality rate would be 28.8% lower if males in the US had the same firearm suicide fatality rate as Canada, and would be equivalent to approximately 9,992 fewer suicide fatalities each year.

The female suicide fatality rate in the US standardized population was lower than that of Canada for those under age 25 and greater for those aged 35 or older. The proportion of female suicide fatalities due to firearms in the US standardized population ranged from 19% among those under age 15 to 36% among those older than 65 years. In contrast, the proportion of female suicide fatalities due to firearms in Canada ranged from less than one percent among those under the age of 15 years to 6% among those aged 55 to 64 years. We estimated that if females in the US had the same firearm suicide fatality rate as Canada, we would observe 93.4% fewer suicide fatalities due to firearms and 19.5% more non-firearm suicide fatalities. The female suicide fatality rate would be 16.0% lower if females in the US had the same firearm suicide fatality rate as Canada, which would be equivalent to approximately 1,638 fewer suicide fatalities each year.

We estimated that the suicide fatality rate would be 25.9% lower if the US had the same suicide fatality rate as Canada, driven by a 79.3% lower rate of firearm-specific suicide fatalities. The lower suicide fatality rate would be equivalent to 11,630 fewer suicide fatalities each year. There was evidence of means replacement for some but not most suicide fatalities, with a 36.0% of firearm suicide fatalities replaced by non-firearm suicide fatalities but 64.0% of firearm fatalities averted entirely.

Discussion

We estimated that the US suicide fatality rate would be about 26% lower than it is now, with 11,630 fewer suicide fatalities each year, if the US had the same levels of civilian firearm ownership as Canada. A 79% reduction in firearm-specific suicide fatalities would drive the estimated difference in overall suicide fatality rates. The greater reduction in suicide fatalities among males (29%) compared to females (16%) is consistent with firearms accounting for a greater proportion of suicide fatalities among males than females. While an estimated 36% of firearm suicides in both sexes would be replaced with non-firearm suicides, most firearm suicide fatalities would be averted and not result in fatalities.

The estimated 26% reduction in suicide fatalities that may be achieved with firearm means restriction is plausible and consistent with the more than 30% reduction in suicide fatalities with coal gas means restriction in the United Kingdom [8] and reductions in suicide fatalities with pesticide means restriction in South Korea [9] and Sri Lanka [10]. The findings that means-restricted suicide fatalities would be partially replaced with suicide fatalities due to other means, but that there would be overall declines in suicide fatalities, is also consistent with the patterns of suicide fatalities documented after means restriction in the United Kingdom, South Korea, and Sri Lanka [810]. The reduction in suicides associated with reduced firearms is also consistent with evidence of reduced all-cause suicides following federal policy changes in Israel and Australia [11,12].

While we adjusted for differences between the US and Canadian population to the extent possible given the study design and availability of data, this study had many limitations. By comparing only two countries, we did not have the ability to control for differences between the two countries including poverty, unemployment, health systems, cultural, or other differences. To the extent that the US and Canada differ in some of these respects, Canada has lower GDP per capita, greater unemployment, lower educational attainment, and lower marriage, each of which are associated with elevated rates of suicide fatalities [34], suggesting that our results may be an underestimate of US suicide fatalities that would be averted in the context of Canadian firearm ownership. While we adjusted for sex, age group, and ethnicity, we could only control for the characteristics available in the Canadian suicide fatality and demographic data. Given that detailed suicide fatality data was not available by ethnicity in Canada, it is not clear whether the associations between ethnicity and suicide observed in the US (i.e., that white individuals are much more likely than black individuals to commit suicide) also hold in Canada. In other words, there may be effect modification by country in this relationship, which could affect our overall results and conclusions.

A further limitation was that the Canadian ethnicity data were collected only from those living in private residences and not collective dwellings, meaning the proportions may not be representative of the entire population of Canada. We were limited to data on three ethnic groups based on the overlap in ethnic groups reported in both the US and Canada, and potential misalignment between US data on “Black” and “American Indian/Alaska Native” individuals with Canadian data on individuals who reported having any African origins or being “Aboriginal.” Those who reported “African origins” are unlikely to be the only individuals who are black in Canada, and some individuals who reported “African origins” may not be black. We also did not have data on whether individuals were both of “African origins” and “Aboriginal,” so our approach assumes that no individuals were in both categories. Individuals with multiple ethnicities were only reflected in one ethnicity category in this analysis.

Finally, the US does not have data on circulating firearms or firearm certificates, and ultimately we cannot measure the exact effect of a change in firearm availability or ownership on suicide deaths. Our conclusions rest on the assumption that if the US had similar firearm ownership rates as in Canada, the firearm suicide death rates in the US would be comparable to those in Canada, given the many other similarities between the two countries.

Conclusion

The US and Canada are similar in many respects, with a notable exception being that Canada has markedly lower firearm ownership across settings, a difference that we drew on to estimate the proportion of suicide fatalities that might be averted with fewer firearms in the US. We estimated that there would be approximately 26% fewer suicide fatalities, equivalent to 11,630 fewer suicide fatalities each year, if the US had firearms means restriction bringing ownership rates equal to those in Canada. Canada’s main approach to restricting firearms is to require licenses for firearms possession. The licensing process requires individuals to have passed a firearm safety course and an additional restricted firearm safety course for firearms. The process also includes evaluation of suicide risk and risk of violence against others. An estimated 77% of the US public supports similar firearm licensing requirements in the US [35], suggesting that it would be feasible for US policymakers to pass such policies, and they would save more than 11,000 lives a year in the US [35]. Such an approach may be urgently called for, given a context of increasing US suicide fatalities over the past 17 years [36].

Supporting information

S1 Text. Detailed summary of methods.

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Canadian ethnicity distribution as estimated through the 2016 Canadian Census, among males aged 0–14.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths and denominators for the US in 2016 according to WISQARS among males aged 0–14, grouped into ethnicity categories to align with Canada.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Calculated firearm and non-firearm suicide rates in the US, standardized to the ethnic distribution of Canada, 2016, males aged 0–14.

(DOCX)

S4 Table. All-cause suicide deaths in the US that would be averted if the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, 2016, among males aged 0–14.

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, population, and crude rates in Canada, according to Statistics Canada, by age and sex, 2016.

(DOCX)

S6 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, population, and crude rates in the US, standardized to the ethnic distribution of Canada, by age and sex, 2016.

(DOCX)

S7 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, denominators, and crude rates for the US according to WISQARS, by age and sex, 2016, grouped into ethnicity categories to align those provided for the Canadian population.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

Decision Letter 0

Kyoung-Sae Na

4 Feb 2020

PONE-D-19-27645

Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US.

PLOS ONE

Dear Ms. Sampson,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Mar 19 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Kyoung-Sae Na, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is a straightforward and methodologically sound paper. My only comment is that there is no discussion of a potential race-suicide effect measure modification by place. In the US, whites are significantly more likely than blacks to complete suicide for all methods of suicide. I would expect this to be consistent in Canada, but I am not sure; the magnitude of the association could also be different. I recognize that the current data prevent such an evaluation in Canada.

I do think it is important to consider, however, because the authors compare the US rates (race and sex standardized) to the Canadian suicide rates in order to estimate the number of suicides averted if the US had the same gun control practices as Canada. Effect measure modification by place may mean that the authors' estimates of potential suicides averted may be underestimated (for example if whites are more likely to commit suicide in Canada than in the US) or overestimated (for example if whites are less likely to commit suicide in Canada than in the US). If there are previous studies that evaluate the association between race and suicide in Canada, the authors may be able to determine if effect measure modification by place may have altered their results.

Overall, excellent work.

Reviewer #2: First, I would like to thank the authors for undertaking the effort to investigate the potential benefits of more restrictive firearm legislation within the US.

In the present paper, 'Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US', the authors investigate a potential reduction in total suicide due to a potential reduction of firearm suicide rates in the US to the level of firearm suicide rates of Canada.

The publication is well written and the methods are described in detail. Furthermore, data are available as support material.

The topic itself is highly relevant and an important public health concern. I support publication of this article.

Some points should, however, be addressed:

- Throughout the article the authors refer to "race", "race and ethnicity" or "race/ethnicity". As the race homo sapiens sapiens only consist of one race with different ethnicities and the term is, therefore, false, I highly suggest deleting the term and only using "ethnicity". (even though the term is wrongly used in official documents in the US).

- When investigating the effect of change in firearm ownership on suicide rates: discussion and presentation of relevant data on Australia, Austria and Israel should be mentioned.

- As the US has no data on circulating firearms and/or firearm certificates, calculating an effect seems difficult. This should be explained in the limitations. Alternatively the authors may also use existing data on countries with a reduction in firearm availability and consecutive reduction in firearm suicides (see previous remark).

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Aaron M Frutos

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Apr 30;15(4):e0232252. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232252.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


31 Mar 2020

To: Kyoung-Sae Na, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

March 6, 2020

Dear Dr. Kyoung-Sae Na,

We would like to thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript. The reviewer comments were extremely helpful, and we believe our paper is stronger now after implementing their suggestions. Below, we detail the changes we made and our responses to each point brought up by the reviewers.

Reviewer #1: This is a straightforward and methodologically sound paper. My only comment is that there is no discussion of a potential race-suicide effect measure modification by place. In the US, whites are significantly more likely than blacks to complete suicide for all methods of suicide. I would expect this to be consistent in Canada, but I am not sure; the magnitude of the association could also be different. I recognize that the current data prevent such an evaluation in Canada.

I do think it is important to consider, however, because the authors compare the US rates (race and sex standardized) to the Canadian suicide rates in order to estimate the number of suicides averted if the US had the same gun control practices as Canada. Effect measure modification by place may mean that the authors' estimates of potential suicides averted may be underestimated (for example if whites are more likely to commit suicide in Canada than in the US) or overestimated (for example if whites are less likely to commit suicide in Canada than in the US). If there are previous studies that evaluate the association between race and suicide in Canada, the authors may be able to determine if effect measure modification by place may have altered their results.

Overall, excellent work.

Our response: Thank you for these comments and for pointing out the possibility of effect measure modification by place in the relationship between race (ethnicity) and suicide. Unfortunately, we are not aware of data on suicide death rates by black individuals compared to white individuals in Canada. Thus, we have added the following statement in the limitations section on page 16:

“Given that detailed suicide fatality data was not available by ethnicity in Canada, it is not clear whether the associations between ethnicity and suicide observed in the US (i.e., that white individuals are much more likely than black individuals to commit suicide) also hold in Canada. In other words, there may be effect modification by country in this relationship, which could affect our overall results and conclusions.”

Additionally, we edited a sentence in the introduction section on page 7 that previously stated, “Black populations typically have lower suicide fatality rates [25], and a greater proportion of the US compared to the Canadian population is Black” to now state, “Black populations typically have lower suicide fatality rates in the US [25], and a greater proportion of the US compared to the Canadian population is Black” (page 7), which is now more correct, since we do not know whether this statement is necessarily true in Canada in addition to the US.

Reviewer #2: First, I would like to thank the authors for undertaking the effort to investigate the potential benefits of more restrictive firearm legislation within the US.

In the present paper, 'Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US', the authors investigate a potential reduction in total suicide due to a potential reduction of firearm suicide rates in the US to the level of firearm suicide rates of Canada.

The publication is well written and the methods are described in detail. Furthermore, data are available as support material.

The topic itself is highly relevant and an important public health concern. I support publication of this article.

Our response: Thank you for these comments.

Some points should, however, be addressed:

1. Throughout the article the authors refer to "race", "race and ethnicity" or "race/ethnicity". As the race homo sapiens sapiens only consist of one race with different ethnicities and the term is, therefore, false, I highly suggest deleting the term and only using "ethnicity". (even though the term is wrongly used in official documents in the US).

Our response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree, and we have deleted all references to “race” throughout the manuscript, tables, and appendix materials; we now only refer to ethnicity.

2. When investigating the effect of change in firearm ownership on suicide rates: discussion and presentation of relevant data on Australia, Austria and Israel should be mentioned.

Our response: Thank you for this suggestion. We have added the following text (along with new references) on page 5 of the introduction:

“Other studies suggest there have been similar reductions in all-cause suicide fatalities after countries have changed federal policies to reduce firearm ownership or access. After Israel restricted weekend access to firearms for Israeli Defense Force soldiers, the suicide rate declined by 40% [11]. After Australia banned long guns and implemented a gun buyback program beginning in 1996, trends in all-cause suicide mortality reversed from increasing 1% percent per year to declining by 1.5% per year [12]. Finally, after Austria made handgun purchase policies more stringent in 1998, there was a decline in the suicide rate due to firearms, but not in the all-cause suicide rate [13].”

Additionally, we added the following sentence on page 15 of the discussion section:

“…The reduction in suicides associated with reduced firearms is also consistent with evidence of reduced all-cause suicides following federal policy changes in Israel and Australia [11,12].”

3. As the US has no data on circulating firearms and/or firearm certificates, calculating an effect seems difficult. This should be explained in the limitations. Alternatively the authors may also use existing data on countries with a reduction in firearm availability and consecutive reduction in firearm suicides (see previous remark).

Our response: We agree with this limitation in our analyses, and we should have been more clear in stating this in the original version. We have added the following sentence to page 16-17in the limitations section:

“Finally, the US does not have data on circulating firearms or firearm certificates, and ultimately we cannot measure the exact effect of a change in firearm availability or ownership on suicide deaths. Our conclusions rest on the assumption that if the US had similar firearm ownership rates as in Canada, the firearm suicide death rates in the US would be comparable to those in Canada, given the many other similarities between the two countries.”

Note: We have also made the required formatting changes listed in the email from the editor. Finally, we have changed the corresponding author to be the first author, Dr. Julia Raifman. Ms. Sampson was made corresponding author for the initial submission only, due to Dr. Raifman’s maternity leave at the time.

Thank you again to each of the reviewers and the editor.

Sincerely,

Julia Raifman, ScD

On behalf of all authors

Boston University School of Public Health

Boston, Massachusetts

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Kyoung-Sae Na

13 Apr 2020

Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US.

PONE-D-19-27645R1

Dear Dr. Raifman,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Kyoung-Sae Na, M.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: Regarding the Revision of "Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US." I reiterate, that the publication is well written and the topic of importance.

I had only later remembered, that also data on Switzerland (where legislation changes similar to the reform in Israel was passed) may be of interest or that newer data on Austria (more in line with the position of the authors results would also be available).

While the addition of these works to the discussion may of course be of interest to the authors, it does not warrant a mandatory revision in my opinion.

I advise to accept the manuscript in its revised form and thank the authors for a valuable contribution.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Kyoung-Sae Na

20 Apr 2020

PONE-D-19-27645R1

Suicide fatalities in the US compared to Canada: Potential suicides averted with lower firearm ownership in the US

Dear Dr. Raifman:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Kyoung-Sae Na

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Text. Detailed summary of methods.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. Canadian ethnicity distribution as estimated through the 2016 Canadian Census, among males aged 0–14.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths and denominators for the US in 2016 according to WISQARS among males aged 0–14, grouped into ethnicity categories to align with Canada.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. Calculated firearm and non-firearm suicide rates in the US, standardized to the ethnic distribution of Canada, 2016, males aged 0–14.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Table. All-cause suicide deaths in the US that would be averted if the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, 2016, among males aged 0–14.

    (DOCX)

    S5 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, population, and crude rates in Canada, according to Statistics Canada, by age and sex, 2016.

    (DOCX)

    S6 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, population, and crude rates in the US, standardized to the ethnic distribution of Canada, by age and sex, 2016.

    (DOCX)

    S7 Table. Firearm and non-firearm suicide deaths, denominators, and crude rates for the US according to WISQARS, by age and sex, 2016, grouped into ethnicity categories to align those provided for the Canadian population.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES