1775 Development of a national hub for reviewing and learning from the deaths of children and young people in Scotland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background</h3> Scotland has a higher mortality rate for under 18s than any other Western European country. Of the 300 children and young people who die annually, approximately a quarter could be prevented. There is currently no national system to support review or to share national learning, and not all deaths are reviewed. The quality of reviews varies across services and Scotland. Healthcare Improvement Scotland and the Care Inspectorate co-host the National Hub for Reviewing and Learning from the Deaths of Children and Young People. <h3>Objectives</h3> The National Hub aims to ensure that the death of every child in Scotland is subject to a quality review by: developing a methodology and documentation to ensure all deaths are reviewed through a high quality and consistent process improving the quality and consistency of existing reviews improving the experiences of and engagement with families and carers, and channelling learning from current review processes across Scotland that could direct action to help reduce preventable deaths. This programme reflects the commitment to fostering a learning system that increases safety and quality improvement amongst services by: supporting individuals to learn through its culture and networks ensuring everyone is informed by evaluation and reflective practice enabling people to assess what is and is not working through the use of qualitative and quantitative data, stories and insights developing processes to aid decision-making and turn knowledge into action building systems to identify ’bright spots’ and generalisable learning, and linking with rUK systems to allow a four nations approach to child death reviews. <h3>Methods</h3> We have worked collaboratively with stakeholders to support implementation of a national child death review process, which will launch during 2021. This includes: establishing an Expert Advisory Group to provide an advisory role through expert (including clinical) input developing national guidance that sets out the process for NHS boards and local authorities to follow when responding to, and reviewing, the death of a child or young person developing a core review data set and online portal for collating data, and gathering views from family members and carers who have been involved in a review process. Reviews will be conducted into the deaths of all live born children up to the date of their 18th birthday, or 26th birthday for care leavers who are in receipt of aftercare or continuing care at the time of their death <h3>Results</h3> The national child death review process will be fully implemented by 1 October 2021. Following implementation, the National Hub will collate and disseminate learning from reviews with the aims of changing future professional clinical practice, informing policy change and reducing avoidable deaths in Scotland. <h3>Conclusions</h3> For the first time in Scotland, national data will be collected on the deaths of all children and young people. Working with NHS boards and local authorities, the ambition is to inform the redesign of pathways and services to ultimately reduce avoidable deaths, and where that is not possible, to improve the experiences of children, young people and their families
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.103 | 0.143 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.014 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".