Continuing major inconsistencies in the classification of unexpected infant deaths

24Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The classification of the cause of unexpected infant deaths by both pathologists and researchers may be quite inconsistent. For example, if an infant is found lying face down on soft bedding the death may still be certified as 'sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)’, ‘accidental suffocation’, ‘undetermined’, ‘unclassified sudden infant death (USID)’, or 'sudden unexpected death in infancy (SUDI)’. As the San Diego definition of SIDS does not appear to be rigorously or consistently applied, clarifying ‘mechanical asphyxia not determined with certainty’ may help to more clearly separate SIDS from USID. Including a classification algorithm with the definition may also help to better define unsafe sleep factors and suffocation. This commentary reviews the current situation with regard to classifying these deaths and concludes that the absence of diagnostic pathological markers with conflicting classification systems has led to idiosyncratic certification practices.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Byard, R. W., Shipstone, R. A., & Young, J. (2019). Continuing major inconsistencies in the classification of unexpected infant deaths. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 64, 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2019.03.007

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free