ArticleBMC public health2017
Exploring coronial determination of intent for poisoning-related deaths in Australia, 2001-2013.
Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toxicological Findings of Self-Poisoning Suicidal Deaths: A Systematic Review by Countries.Toxics · 2022Review
- Intoxication-Related Deaths in a Poisoning Center in Isfahan: Demographic and Other-Related Factors.Advanced biomedical research · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, systematic variation in the classification of intent in pharmaceutical poisoning deaths have been identified between jurisdictions. This study aimed to explore whether the coronial determination of intent (unintentional, intentional, undetermined) for pharmaceutical-related poisoning deaths may have affected death rates over time and by jurisdiction in Australia.
methodsA retrospective examination of mortality records in the National Coronial Information System (NCIS) during 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2013 was conducted. The NCIS is a national internet-based data storage and retrieval system for deaths that were notified to a coroner. Pharmaceutical deaths due to unintentional, intentional or undetermined intent were identified using the NCIS classification. Proportions of the different intent classifications and the mortality rates by intent over time were compared between jurisdictions.
resultsThere were 17,895 pharmaceutical-related poisoning deaths in Australia between 2001 and 2013 that had closed cases in the NCIS. Proportions of deaths classified as unintentional (48.3-66.3%), intentional (24.7-35.9%) and undetermined (6.7-24.7%) varied significantly among Australian jurisdictions. There were significant increases in the rate of classification of unintentional poisoning for some states, and significant increases in intentional poisoning classification in Western Australia, and decreases in New South Wales and Victoria. There was no significant change in classification of undetermined intent.
conclusionsSignificant variation in classifications of intent, both between state jurisdictions and over time, may be the result of regional differences in demographics and increases in prescription drug misuse. However, the inconsistent use of 'undetermined' intent between state jurisdictions suggests coroners may experience varying difficulty in retrospectively ruling on intent in the equivocal circumstances of pharmaceutical poisoning. The widespread use of psychological autopsy may assist coroners to classify intent, while the implementation of new classifications for pharmaceutical poisoning death may overcome some of the inherent difficulty in intent classification and improve the potential for injury surveillance irrespective of intent.
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.