Rocha Luciana A, Fromknecht Catharine Q, Redman Sarah Davis, Brady Joanne E, Hodge Sarah E, Noe Rebecca S
NORC at the University of Chicago - Public Health Research, Roles: Data acquisition, analysis and/or interpretation, manuscript creation and/or revision, approved final version for publication, accountable for all aspects of the work, writing assistance and/or technical editing.
NORC at the University of Chicago - Public Health Research, Roles: Project conception and/or design, manuscript creation and/or revision, approved final version for publication, accountable for all aspects of the work, principal investigator of the current study, general supervision.
Acad Forensic Pathol. 2017 Jun 1;7(2):221-239. doi: 10.23907/2017.023.
The number of disaster-related deaths recorded by vital statistics departments often differs from that reported by other agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-National Weather Service storm database and the American Red Cross. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has launched an effort to improve disaster-related death scene investigation reporting practices to make data more comparable across jurisdictions, improve accuracy of reporting disaster-related deaths, and enhance identification of risk and protective factors. We conducted a literature review to examine how death scene data are collected and how such data are used to determine disaster relatedness.
Two analysts conducted a parallel search using Google and Google Scholar. We reviewed published peer-reviewed articles and unpublished documents including relevant forms, protocols, and worksheets from coroners, medical examiners, and death scene investigators.
We identified 177 documents: 32 published peer-reviewed articles and 145 other documents (grey literature). Published articles suggested no consistent approach for attributing deaths to a disaster. Researchers generally depended on death certificates to identify disaster-related deaths; several studies also drew on supplemental sources, including medical examiner, coroner, and active surveillance reports.
These results highlight the critical importance of consistent, accurate data collection during a death investigation. Review of the grey literature found variation in use of death scene data collection tools, indicating the potential for widespread inconsistency in data captured for routine reporting and public health surveillance. Findings from this review will be used to develop guidelines and tools for capturing disaster-related death investigation data.
人口动态统计部门记录的与灾害相关的死亡人数往往与其他机构报告的不同,这些机构包括美国国家海洋和大气管理局-国家气象局风暴数据库以及美国红十字会。疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)已着手努力改进与灾害相关的死亡现场调查报告做法,以使各辖区的数据更具可比性,提高与灾害相关死亡报告的准确性,并加强对风险和保护因素的识别。我们进行了一项文献综述,以研究死亡现场数据是如何收集的,以及这些数据是如何用于确定与灾害的相关性的。
两名分析师使用谷歌和谷歌学术进行了平行检索。我们查阅了已发表的同行评审文章和未发表的文件,包括来自验尸官、法医和死亡现场调查员的相关表格、协议和工作表。
我们识别出177份文件:32篇已发表的同行评审文章和145份其他文件(灰色文献)。已发表的文章表明,对于将死亡归因于灾害没有一致的方法。研究人员通常依靠死亡证明来识别与灾害相关的死亡;几项研究还借鉴了补充来源,包括法医、验尸官和主动监测报告。
这些结果凸显了在死亡调查期间进行一致、准确的数据收集的至关重要性。对灰色文献的审查发现,死亡现场数据收集工具的使用存在差异,这表明在为常规报告和公共卫生监测收集的数据中可能存在广泛的不一致性。本次综述的结果将用于制定收集与灾害相关的死亡调查数据的指南和工具。