Skip to content

Alexander Braund

Evidence boundary. This page is a structured project extraction from the linked primary Prevention of Future Deaths source. It is not the report text. Do not infer cause, prevalence or product-wide performance beyond the source and the explicit qualification below.

Open the primary Judiciary source · Source register: SRC-003 · Return to all included reports · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map

Report metadata

Field Value
PFD reference 2022-0407
Registered primary source SRC-003
Report date 2022-12-20
Coroner area Nottingham and Nottinghamshire
Clinical setting Secure healthcare
Care transition Clinical record to investigation
Primary workflow group Record integrity and provenance
Primary browsing context Secure and custodial care
Predominant information boundary Hybrid paper and digital record

The workflow, browsing-context and predominant-boundary fields are retained navigation aids. They are not additional coronial findings, and a single primary value cannot express every aspect of a multi-setting or multi-mechanism report.

Care-pathway classification

This classification distinguishes where safety-relevant information or work arose, where action was expected and where the digital or information workflow failed. It is a project coding of the source, not a coronial statement. “Origin” does not mean the organisation caused the harm.

Dimension Project classification
Settings and pathway participants Prison, custody or secure healthcare, Police, local authority or other non-health agency
Information or work-item origin Prison, custody or secure healthcare
Origin care context(s) Secure or custodial healthcare
Expected action destination Police, local authority or other non-health agency
Destination care context(s) Non-health agency
Directional pathway Prison, custody or secure healthcare → Police, local authority or other non-health agency
Care-setting span One care setting
Sector boundary Health and non-health sectors
Failure point Transfer or interface
Classification confidence high

Classification note: The source identifies an amendment in the prison-healthcare SystmOne record and explicitly compares the live audit information with the printed record used at the inquest. The retrospective amendment was not readily apparent in that printed representation, so the pathway is coded from secure healthcare to the non-health inquest/investigation view.

Classification confidence applies only to this care-pathway coding. It is separate from extraction confidence, source authority and causal certainty.

Evidence status and qualification

Field Status
Extraction confidence high
Verification status Primary source linked; high-confidence extraction
Response evidence status Response evidence noted
Registered response sources SRC-017
Non-exclusive mechanism codes PROV, VIS, GOV

Qualification recorded in the dataset: One investigated record; prevalence unknown

“Response evidence noted” means only that the row qualification refers to response/respondent evidence or records a recipient's post-report position. The linked IDs enumerate the official response attachments registered for this row; they do not imply that every response supports every part of the qualification, and they do not establish implementation. “Not assessed” makes no claim about whether a response exists.

Structured project extraction

These fields are analytical summaries, not quotations.

Project summary of the coroner's concern

Record integrity and safety features required clarification

Requested action

TPP and care organisations to act

Digital safety characterisation

Dimension Project extraction
System or record type SystmOne
Digital function Audit/provenance
Failure mode Retrospective amendment was not apparent on printed summary
Human-factors issue Ordinary view implied all text existed at original time
Workflow issue Audit view and routine/printed representation diverged
Information issue Amendment provenance hidden in used representation

Downstream Defence trace

Canonical candidate requirements that cite this report: REQ-008. These links are analytical translations and do not make the requirement a coronial recommendation or a validated Defence control.

The included-case dataset preserves early legacy_military_relevance and legacy_derived_requirement fields for audit history. They are not published here as requirements and must not override the canonical REQ register. New report rows do not need to populate them.