Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31239940›Full record

ArticleAcademic forensic pathology2016

Dissecting and Streamlining the Medical Record Acquisition Process in Death Investigation Systems.

Nicole A Croom, Judy Melinek

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic forensic pathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nicole A CroomUniversity of California San Francisco School of Medicine - Undergraduate Medical Education and University of California Berkeley School of Public Health.
Judy MelinekPathologyExpert.com and Alameda County Office of the Sheriff-Coroner.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though medicolegal death investigation (MDI) systems are generally associated with criminal justice, they serve an integral role in the realm of public health and safety. Medicolegal death investigation offices collect information, including medical records, from a variety of outside sources. For data to travel efficiently, transmission should be fully integrated between the MDI office and external organizations. This is often not the case. Delays in the transmission of medical records in particular lead to subsequent delays in autopsy report completion and death certification or to resource waste in cases where a timely record would have let the pathologist know an autopsy was not required. Almost no peer-reviewed literature currently exists regarding the problem of record acquisition by MDI systems. To develop a better understanding of how electronic medical records have impacted MDI systems, we conducted a mixed methods survey through the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) e-mail listserv. We inquired about the medical records acquisition processes at MDI systems around the nation to gauge opinions about the use of electronic health data and the integration of MDI data in public health. Concurrently, we piloted a quality improvement project at the Alameda County Sheriff-Coroner's Office (ACSCO) in Oakland, California, in which we worked with various hospitals to get ACSCO employees direct access to decedents' electronic health records. With data from the survey and pilot project, we were able to document the barriers encountered when attempting to reform medical record acquisition and to suggest systemic changes to reduce delays and wasted resources.

Indexed as

Electronic health recordElectronic medical recordForensic pathologyMedical record acquisitionPublic health

Identifiers

PMID31239940
PMCPMC6474501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.