Kiefer Fraser-Phillips
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-185 · Return to all included reports · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map
Report metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| PFD reference | 2026-0216 |
| Registered primary source | SRC-185 |
| Report date | 2026-04-14 |
| Coroner area | Birmingham and Solihull |
| Clinical setting | Mental-health inpatient care |
| Care transition | Therapeutic observation to contemporaneous ward record |
| Primary workflow group | Triage, observations and decision support |
| Primary browsing context | Mental health care |
| Predominant information boundary | Within a care setting |
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 | Inpatient or secure mental-health care |
| Information or work-item origin | Inpatient or secure mental-health care |
| Origin care context(s) | Secondary care |
| Expected action destination | Inpatient or secure mental-health care |
| Destination care context(s) | Secondary care |
| Directional pathway | Inpatient or secure mental-health care → Inpatient or secure mental-health care |
| Care-setting span | One care setting |
| Sector boundary | Health services only |
| Failure point | Originating service |
| Classification confidence | high |
Classification note: Observations arose and were used on one inpatient mental-health ward; the failure occurred when creating the contemporaneous electronic record.
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; qualified extraction |
| Response evidence status | Response evidence noted |
| Registered response sources | SRC-227 |
| Non-exclusive mechanism codes | GOV, HF, PROV, RES |
Qualification recorded in the dataset: The death was recorded as sudden unexplained death in schizophrenia; the report presents observation-recording resilience as a future risk rather than a causal finding. The Judiciary page says 2026-04-14 while the embedded PFD is signed 2026-04-15.
“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
Connectivity failure created a risk that observations would not be recorded accurately and effectively
Requested action
Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust to address recording resilience and physical-health care planning
Digital safety characterisation
| Dimension | Project extraction |
|---|---|
| System or record type | Wireless electronic observation device |
| Digital function | Bedside observation recording |
| Failure mode | The device lost Wi-Fi and observations could not be entered until staff returned to the ward office |
| Human-factors issue | A mobile workflow depended on coverage unavailable at the point of care |
| Workflow issue | No resilient contemporaneous recording path existed during connectivity loss |
| Information issue | Observation timing and content could be recorded later rather than at the point of care |
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.
Return to all included reports · Open the corpus profile · Review assurance and uncertainty · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map