Table 3.
Limitation domains, remediation and reported impacts
| Domain – Information was not … | Number of publications (proportions)a | Reported impact on findings | Actions taken |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVAILABLE | |||
| Open cases | 23 (34%) | Under-reporting of potentially relevant cases | Exclusion of all open cases Exclusion of recent deaths |
| Inability to verify information | Used additional data source | ||
| Whole documents/information of interest | 26 (39%) | Unable to conduct detailed analysis | Access paper-based record Adjust analysis Cases not categorised |
| Under-reporting of potentially relevant cases | Exclusion of cases | ||
| Small dataset | 2 (3%) | Unable to detect trends and evaluate impacts of interventions | Acknowledged limitation |
| COMPLETE | |||
| Missing data on available info of interest | 16 (24%) | Missing/incomplete data for analysis Limitation of level of analysis |
Access paper-based record Cases not categorised Variables excluded from analyses Used additional data source Acknowledged uncertainty (absence of data does not mean factor not associated) |
| ACCURATE | |||
| Potential for human error | 5 (7%) | Errors in information recording during inquest (e.g. spelling of drug names) | Not specified |
| Potential for human error in coding | 7 (10%) | Missing data for some variables Misclassification of variables Affects accuracy of NCIS |
Access paper-based record Used additional data source Careful interpretation of reports |
| Misclassification of intent re: intentional self-harm | 5 (7%) | Under-reporting of potentially relevant cases | Used additional data source |
| Discrepancies between the National Coronial Information System (NCIS) and ICD-10 | 3 (4%) | Under-reporting of potentially relevant cases | Used additional data source (ICD-10) |
aProportions add up to over 100% as studies may report multiple categories of limitations