Literature DB >> 22291169

Factors predicting coroners' decisions to hold discretionary inquests.

Simon J Walter1, Lyndal Bugeja, Matthew J Spittal, David M Studdert.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coroners in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and other countries in the Commonwealth hold inquests into deaths in two situations. Mandatory inquests are held when statutory rules dictate they must be; discretionary inquests are held based on the decisions of individual coroners. Little is known as to how and why coroners select particular deaths for discretionary inquests.
METHODS: We analyzed the deaths investigated by Australian coroners for a period of seven and one-half years in five jurisdictions. We classified inquests as mandatory or discretionary. After excluding mandatory inquests, we used logistic regression analysis to identify the factors associated with coroners' decisions to hold discretionary inquests.
RESULTS: Of 20 379 reported deaths due to external causes, 1252 (6.1%) proceeded to inquest. Of these inquests, 490 (39.1%) were mandatory and 696 (55.6%) were discretionary. In unadjusted analyses, the rates of discretionary inquests varied widely in terms of age of the decedent and cause of death. In adjusted analyses, the odds of discretionary inquests declined with the age of the decedent; the odds were highest for children (odds ratio [OR] 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-3.06) and lowest for people aged 65 years and older (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28-0.51). Using poisoning as a reference cause of death, the odds of discretionary inquests were highest for fatal complications of medical care (OR 12.83, 95% CI 8.65-19.04) and lowest for suicides (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30-0.65).
INTERPRETATION: Deaths that coroners choose to take to inquest differ systematically from those they do not. Although this vetting process is invisible, it may influence the public's understanding of safety risks, fatal injury and death.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22291169      PMCID: PMC3307557          DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.110865

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  7 in total

1.  Accountability sought by patients following adverse events from medical care: the New Zealand experience.

Authors:  Marie Bismark; Edward Dauer; Ron Paterson; David Studdert
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  ICD-10 mortality coding and the NCIS: a comparative study.

Authors:  Leanne Daking; Leonie Dodds
Journal:  Health Inf Manag       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.185

3.  Impact of coronial investigations on manner and cause of death determinations in Australia, 2000-2007.

Authors:  David M Studdert; Stephen M Cordner
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 7.738

4.  Reducing drowning deaths: the continued challenge of immersion fatalities in Australia.

Authors:  Richard C Franklin; Justin P Scarr; John H Pearn
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 7.738

Review 5.  Strengthening the prevention and care of injuries worldwide.

Authors:  Charles Mock; Robert Quansah; Rajam Krishnan; Carlos Arreola-Risa; Frederick Rivara
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-06-26       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Reforming coronership: international perspectives and contemporary developments.

Authors:  Ian Freckelton
Journal:  J Law Med       Date:  2008-12

7.  Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action.

Authors:  C Vincent; M Young; A Phillips
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-06-25       Impact factor: 79.321

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  Contrasting coroners.

Authors:  Andrew L McCallum; Albert E Lauwers; Daniel E Cass; Michael Blain
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Duration of death investigations that proceed to inquest in Australia.

Authors:  David M Studdert; Simon J Walter; Celia Kemp; Georgina Sutherland
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 2.399

3.  Suicide in late life: A viewpoint.

Authors:  Diego De Leo; Andrea Viecelli Giannotti
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 4.  The utility of medico-legal databases for public health research: a systematic review of peer-reviewed publications using the National Coronial Information System.

Authors:  Lyndal Bugeja; Joseph E Ibrahim; Noha Ferrah; Briony Murphy; Melissa Willoughby; David Ranson
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2016-04-12
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.