Incidentally, for all the hullabaloo about the lack of government funding for gun research, I note that part of the funding for this substantial project came from the National Science Foundation, which also happens to be a government agency.Yes, there are 'other ways'. The CDC was busted *(lost its Federal funding for "Gun Violence" research) because it pursued an obvious bias in reporting on firearms injuries. It focused on the availability of guns with little or no information about how some societies suffered more (gun) violence than other societies. Its reporting was generally not balanced by providing information on how firearms ownership provided a benefit to private citizens in violent demographics. It may be that NSF has found a way to provide a more 'balanced' reportage.
Obviously, the lack of CDC support for gun research has created real gaps in the evidence about gun violence; perhaps there are other ways to skin the proverbial research cat.
The JAMA report focused on the societal causes of violence, focusing on gun violence, and concluded that demographic signifiers were one method of predicting victims of violence.
If the CDC had made the effort, perhaps they would still receive federal funding for firearms research. I note, however, that the CDC can still report anything they wish to about firearms injuries; they just don't get to use your federal tax dollars to tout their political bias.