Skip to content

Michael Nye

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-044 · Return to all included reports · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map

Report metadata

Field Value
PFD reference 2024-0082
Registered primary source SRC-044
Report date 2024-02-13
Coroner area Berkshire
Clinical setting Emergency department
Care transition Laboratory/external imaging to ED
Primary workflow group Diagnostic results and investigations
Primary browsing context Acute and emergency care
Predominant information boundary Between care settings

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 Secondary acute or outpatient care, Laboratory, radiology or diagnostic service
Information or work-item origin Multiple settings or services
Origin care context(s) Diagnostic service, Secondary care
Expected action destination Multiple settings or services
Destination care context(s) Diagnostic service, Secondary care
Directional pathway Multiple settings or services → Multiple settings or services
Care-setting span Multiple care settings
Sector boundary Health services only
Failure point Multiple points
Classification confidence high

Classification note: The report explicitly combines two opposite-direction flows: delayed laboratory results to the emergency department and a burdensome external CT request from the emergency department, with ineffective night escalation. Origins, destinations and failure points are therefore multiple across diagnostic and secondary-care contexts.

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 Not assessed in this dataset
Registered response sources None registered for this row
Non-exclusive mechanism codes LOOP, ALERT, HF, RES, GOV

Qualification recorded in the dataset: Digital component is one of several coupled concerns

“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

Night-time result notification and external imaging workflow required action

Requested action

Hospital and pathology service to act

Digital safety characterisation

Dimension Project extraction
System or record type Electronic Patient Record and external CT request process
Digital function Results/imaging request
Failure mode Night-time blood-result completion and notification were delayed; CT request process was burdensome
Human-factors issue Busy night workflow and time-consuming external process
Workflow issue Escalation pathways were ineffective at night
Information issue Delayed result and request state

Downstream Defence trace

No canonical candidate Defence requirement currently cites this report. This does not imply that the mechanism is irrelevant; any mapping must be added and qualified in the controlled requirements register.

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.