ArticlePediatrics2017
Variations in Cause-of-Death Determination for Sudden Unexpected Infant Deaths.
Article in Pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sudden unexpected deaths in children: distinct entities.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- A narrative review of sudden infant death syndrome: pathophysiology, risk factors, and prevention.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Hidden and Under-Recognized Causes of Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI): A Comprehensive Review of Autopsy Findings.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The French registry of sudden unexpected death in infancy (SUDI): a 7-year review of available data.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Accuracy and validity of determined cause of death and manner of death following forensic autopsy prosection.Journal of clinical pathology · 2024Article
- Understanding three approaches to reporting sudden unexpected infant death in the USA.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2024Article
- Unexplained and Unexpected Pediatric Deaths: Forensic Review and New Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Current SIDS research: time to resolve conflicting research hypotheses and collaborate.Pediatric research · 2023Review
- Sudden Unexpected Infant Deaths: 2015-2020.Pediatrics · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Indeterminacy of the Diagnosis of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Leading to Problems with the Validity of Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A proof-of-concept study to construct Bayesian network decision models for supporting the categorization of sudden unexpected infant death.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Half Century Since SIDS: A Reappraisal of Terminology.Pediatrics · 2021Article
- Explaining Sudden Unexpected Infant Deaths, 2011-2017.Pediatrics · 2021Article
- An evaluation of pathologists' application of the diagnostic criteria from the San Diego definition of SIDS and unclassified sudden infant death.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Protocols, practices, and needs for investigating sudden unexpected infant deaths.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2020Article
- Revisiting the Neuropathology of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS).Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Inconsistent classification of unexplained sudden deaths in infants and children hinders surveillance, prevention and research: recommendations from The 3rd International Congress on Sudden Infant and Child Death.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2019Article
- Beyond birth outcomes: Interpregnancy interval and injury-related infant mortality.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo quantify and describe variation in cause-of-death certification of sudden unexpected infant deaths (SUIDs) among US medical examiners and coroners.
methodsFrom January to November 2014, we conducted a nationally representative survey of US medical examiners and coroners who certify infant deaths. Two-stage unequal probability sampling with replacement was used. Medical examiners and coroners were asked to classify SUIDs based on hypothetical scenarios and to describe the evidence considered and investigative procedures used for cause-of-death determination. Frequencies and weighted percentages were calculated.
resultsOf the 801 surveys mailed, 60% were returned, and 377 were deemed eligible and complete. Medical examiners and coroners classification of infant deaths varied by scenario. For 3 scenarios portraying potential airway obstruction and negative autopsy findings, 61% to 69% classified the death as suffocation/asphyxia. In the last scenario, which portrayed a healthy infant in a safe sleep environment with negative autopsy findings, medical examiners and coroners classified the death as sudden infant death syndrome (38%) and SUID (30%). Reliance on investigative procedures to determine cause varied, but 94% indicated using death scene investigations, 88% full autopsy, 85% toxicology analyses, and 82% medical history review.
conclusionsUS medical examiners and coroners apply variable practices to classify and investigate SUID, and thus, they certify the same deaths differently. This variability influences surveillance and research, impacts true understanding of infant mortality causes, and inhibits our ability to accurately monitor and ultimately prevent future deaths. Findings may inform future strategies for promoting standardized practices for SUID classification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.