Claims register
This register contains selected case, corpus, contextual and Defence-translation claims that need stable identifiers. It is not a row-by-row representation of all included reports; use the all-report catalogue for that purpose.
The fields deliberately separate statement type, source/verification, report/mechanism trace and applicability. “High confidence” is not used as a catch-all for different kinds of certainty.
| Claim ID | Claim | Statement type | Evidence and verification | Report / mechanism trace | Applicability / residual gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLM-001 | Rhodes' markedly abnormal NT-proBNP result and action advice were filed without action; weak first-page/highlight salience was suggested | Coronial concern plus respondent technical account | Sources: SRC-001, SRC-018; report and response checked | Reports: 2026-0083; mechanisms: VIS LOOP HF ALERT GOV |
Direct to the investigated case; contribution of each interface/workload factor cannot be isolated |
| CLM-002 | National cervical-screening non-responder status was not automatically supplied to EMIS or SystmOne as a computable warning in the Ross evidence | Coronial concern clarified by respondents | Sources: SRC-002, SRC-016, SRC-076; report and responses checked | Reports: 2023-0067; mechanisms: IDPOP ALERT LOOP INT GOV |
Existing due/outstanding smear alerts must not be misreported as absent; current product behaviour requires recheck |
| CLM-003 | A retrospective SystmOne amendment was not apparent on the printed/editable summary used in the Braund investigation, although the live audit trail retained the history | Coronial concern plus respondent clarification | Sources: SRC-003, SRC-017; report and response checked | Reports: 2022-0407; mechanisms: PROV VIS GOV |
One investigated record; wider prevalence and current export behaviour are unknown |
| CLM-004 | Reddington's ambulance ePRF required separate access and was routinely not reviewed in the receiving emergency workflow | Coronial concern plus respondent account | Sources: SRC-004, SRC-015; report and joint response checked | Reports: 2021-0312; mechanisms: INT LOOP HF RES GOV |
The proposed FHIR remedy was not a coronial finding or proof of implementation |
| CLM-005 | Stringer's electronic enquiry could enter an administrative stream without reaching a clinician or the clinical record | Coronial concern plus respondent account | Sources: SRC-014, SRC-023; report and response checked | Reports: 2024-0555; mechanisms: LOOP VIS HF PROV GOV |
The incident software supplier is not identified in official material |
| CLM-006 | The current pass logged 87 unique candidates, fully extracted 71 included reports and excluded 16 | Dataset result | Sources: SRC-013; generated counts checked against the screening and included-case datasets | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | Describes this pass only; not incidence, prevalence, trend or an exhaustive interval-wide corpus |
| CLM-007 | Wrong-practice registration could make DPHC patients operationally invisible to safety searches | Defence hypothesis / analytical analogy | Sources: SRC-005, SRC-002, SRC-021; mechanism analogues in SRC-002 and SRC-021 | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | Requires DPHC-specific workflow, cohort and incident evidence before programme use |
| CLM-008 | Thompson's abnormal result was electronically available but the workflow lacked efficient accountable alert delivery | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-019; primary report checked | Reports: 2024-0323; mechanisms: LOOP ALERT RES VIS GOV |
One investigation; does not establish that electronic alerting alone would have prevented the death |
| CLM-009 | Cassidy's recorded allergy was not routinely available or integrated into the receiving hospital workflow | Coronial finding/concern | Sources: SRC-020; primary report checked | Reports: 2023-0337; mechanisms: INT VIS HF GOV |
Applies to the systems and access described at the time of the report |
| CLM-010 | Jordan's receiving service obtained the permanent-practice record rather than the more recent temporary-practice record | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-021; primary report checked | Reports: 2024-0056; mechanisms: IDPOP INT VIS GOV |
Direct mobile-population mechanism; military applicability remains analytical translation |
| CLM-011 | Official ICMM pages displayed conflicting 2026 abstract deadlines when checked on 14 July 2026 | Administrative source conflict | Sources: SRC-007, SRC-009; both official pages checked | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | Submission portal or organiser confirmation is required |
| CLM-012 | Reproducible collection and thematic analysis of PFD reports is an established research approach | External methodological context | Sources: SRC-024, SRC-025, SRC-026; peer-reviewed sources checked | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | Subject-specific precedents do not make this rapid review systematic or exhaustive |
| CLM-013 | Military EHR literature identifies interoperability, infrastructure and operational-context challenges relevant to this translation | External literature finding | Sources: SRC-027; peer-reviewed review checked | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | Does not show that coroner-derived requirements transfer unchanged to every military service |
| CLM-014 | A reported increase in all PFDs does not establish an increase in digital-health-related PFDs | Analytical limitation | Sources: SRC-028; scope logic | Contextual or dataset claim; no report/mechanism assignment | A digital-specific trend needs stable annual coding and a denominator |
| CLM-015 | King's handwritten recommendation to restart anticoagulation was not surfaced through the digital workflow, and the electronic prescribing system had no automatic prompt to review the continuing medication suspension | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-022; primary report checked | Reports: 2023-0312; mechanisms: VIS ALERT LOOP HF PROV |
Applies to the investigated hybrid-record workflow; it does not establish current behaviour elsewhere or the safety of any product generally |
| CLM-016 | Hughes' duplicate checking was optional, and replacement risked losing local prescribing safety controls | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-041; primary report checked | Reports: 2025-0511; mechanisms: ALERT LOOP GOV HF |
One report; current behaviour is unknown |
| CLM-017 | In Billings' case, EPS cancellation after pharmacy download allowed duplicate active supply, and transaction state was not ascertainable before reissue | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-042; primary report checked | Reports: 2024-0656; mechanisms: INT LOOP VIS RES |
Report-specific; wider prevalence and current behaviour are unknown |
| CLM-018 | Separate Omnicell and ePMA systems produced contradictory dispensing and administration records in Gibson's case | Coronial concern | Sources: SRC-043; primary report checked | Reports: 2025-0630; mechanisms: INT PROV HF GOV LOOP |
The report noted an opportunity for harm, but toxicology did not show additional ingestion |
| CLM-019 | Broad operational alerts in Thornton's case were inaccessible or insufficiently particular to healthcare, and there was no formal cross-role handover | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-066; primary report checked | Reports: 2026-0200; mechanisms: INT VIS ALERT LOOP HF GOV |
The report identifies a future-death risk, not digital causation of the fatal assault |
| CLM-020 | In the Binfield, Richards and Karbauskas prison cluster, risk information was fragmented across P-NOMIS, SystmOne, paper and email and across transitions | Coronial concern across a clustered report | Sources: SRC-074; primary report checked | Reports: 2025-0079; mechanisms: INT VIS LOOP PROV HF RES GOV |
One PFD covering three deaths; the digital contribution is inseparable from staffing, culture and contract failures |
| CLM-021 | Caliel Smith-Kwami's amino-acid result raising possible hyperinsulinism entered the electronic record, yet no clinician was aware before his death; the consultant said the EHR did not highlight ready results and the former paper notification had been lost | Coronial narrative conclusion and future-death concern | Sources: SRC-106; primary report checked | Reports: UNREF-2018-CALIEL-SMITH-KWAMI; mechanisms: LOOP ALERT VIS HF GOV |
The alerting defect was one part of wider analyser, discharge, result-chasing and referral failures; current system behaviour is unknown |
| CLM-022 | Lorenzo's introduction was accompanied by insufficient staff training and premature closure of Spencer's access plan, leaving no further review; the inquest conclusion said IT and administrative system failures contributed to her decline | Coronial narrative conclusion and future-death concern | Sources: SRC-109; primary report checked | Reports: UNREF-2018-MARGARET-SPENCER; mechanisms: LOOP RES HF GOV |
Migration, training and administrative input were jointly implicated; the report does not isolate Lorenzo product design |
| CLM-023 | In Lunt's case, agency-care observations were entered either in substantive staff members' names or only as 'Agency Staff', making it difficult or impossible to identify who performed care | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-116; primary report checked | Reports: 2018-0164; mechanisms: PROV HF GOV |
The death was from natural causes; the concern applies to the investigated local identity and recording workflow |
| CLM-024 | Senior-clinician advice for six weeks of Tinzaparin was recorded in handwritten notes but not the electronic notes used by the junior doctor, who prescribed four weeks | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-121; primary report checked | Reports: 2018-0259; mechanisms: PROV VIS HF LOOP |
The coroner said it was not possible to determine whether the prescription ending more than minimally contributed to the death |
| CLM-025 | Welch's urgent radiology images could not be transferred electronically from Wales to the English specialist centre; printing and faxing failed when the only printer lacked ink, delaying review | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-122; primary report checked | Reports: 2018-0267; mechanisms: INT RES LOOP GOV |
The coroner accepted that the delays did not cause the death and that any contribution was unclear |
| CLM-026 | Grant's EPR VTE alert appeared only on record exit; the record was accessed 27 times without staff recalling the alert, and omitted prophylaxis remained unresolved | Coronial concern drawing on Trust root-cause analysis | Sources: SRC-125; primary report checked | Reports: UNREF-2018-MARIAN-GRANT; mechanisms: ALERT VIS HF LOOP |
The Trust analysis described an avoidable VTE event, but the coroner's concern also involved ward placement and other failed checks; the interface contribution cannot be isolated |
| CLM-027 | Price's GP and mental-health IT systems were incompatible, delaying critical assessment information through fax or post; during a system outage, a promised callback was not completed and recording and follow-up were questioned | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-126; primary report checked | Reports: UNREF-2018-PAUL-PRICE; mechanisms: INT RES LOOP GOV |
The inquest returned an open conclusion; the report does not establish that either digital mechanism caused the death |
| CLM-028 | In report 2018-0405, electronic records described as updated or validated could obscure original content, and the coroner could not identify how a user would readily see what had originally been written | Coronial future-death concern | Sources: SRC-127; primary report checked | Reports: 2018-0405; mechanisms: PROV VIS HF GOV |
The coroner expressly said the reported issues could not be said to have caused or contributed to this death and qualified the concern by reference to user understanding |
Status dimensions
- Source authority: coronial report, official response, official context, peer-reviewed research, local dataset or sponsor lead.
- Statement type: coronial concern, respondent account, reviewer coding, cross-case synthesis or Defence translation.
- Verification: source located, extracted once, independently checked, or recheck required.
- Thematic support: recurrence, diversity, consistency and counter-considerations within the bounded corpus.
- Applicability: direct case evidence, transferable analogue or hypothesis requiring Defence evidence.
Open gaps and independent-check requirements remain in the validation queue.
Maintenance
Edit claims.csv, then run node scripts/generate-claims-page.mjs. Do not edit this page directly. Preserve retired identifiers rather than reusing them.