Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Moderator GLOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Near Malmesbury, Wiltshire
    Posts
    3,068
    Likes (Given)
    3083
    Likes (Received)
    2177

    Feedback Requested: Inclusion of media reports in incident reporting systems

    There are a number of reasons why fatality reports are not discussed in public forums (legal concerns, pride, privacy, professional reputation) but then again these are the reports which make the (social) media. Sometimes there is good reporting (http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/lifestyle/11212-deep.html – 27 August 14, report into the double fatality in the Plura Cave System, Norway) but in the majority of cases, the media do not understand and are simply looking for a news story rather than to improve safety.

    Something I am considering, but have not yet made a decision on, is whether to make the fatality reports public and provide links to the media outlets but not provide any analysis; I already don’t provide public analysis on fatalities because of the lack of data available. I would also look to include any public information which arises at a later date e.g. Fatal Accident Inquiry or Coroner’s Inquest reports; these could be added by the community as a submitted report to an established incident.*

    The reason for considering this is because the number of fatalities is very small compared to the numbers of dives undertaken (approximately 1-2:100 000 dives) and therefore it is hard to de-identify fatality reports. Furthermore, once that level of de-identification takes place, what are the chances of learning anything from the incident?

    However, I am also conscious that this goes against what DISMS was setup to be – an online, open but confidential reporting system. Rest assured, public non-fatal reports would not have any media reports attached to them unless the reporter added them themselves – I do not want to compromise that confidentiality.

    Therefore, I would be grateful for any feedback on the proposal because ultimately DISMS is a tool for the community and not for me, and I should be reacting to what would help safety in the wider context rather than just my views.

    Original posted here

    Regards




    *The DISMS database is constructed such that multiple reports can be added by different users/reports to a single incident, and multiple analyses can be added to incidents too. The normal flow is that an incident report is entered into the system by a user (diver, buddy, EMS etc) and submitted, I then review it, create an Incident, and then two are linked. As more reports are added, then can be assigned to a single Incident.
    Gareth

    www.imagesoflife.co.uk - Underwater Print Sales, Teaching and Stock Library
    www.cognitas.org.uk - Improving Safety by Challenging Current Practices
    www.divingincidents.org - Diving Incident and Safety Management System (DISMS)
    - 2014 Report here

    “Set your expectations high; find men and women whose integrity and values you respect; get their agreement on a course of action; and give them your ultimate trust.”

    “It is far better to be trusted and respected than it is to be liked.”

  2. #2
    Moderator GLOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Near Malmesbury, Wiltshire
    Posts
    3,068
    Likes (Given)
    3083
    Likes (Received)
    2177
    55 views and no comment...

    Surprised given the normal views on the subject of discussing fatalities.

    Or maybe not bothered!

    Regards
    Gareth

    www.imagesoflife.co.uk - Underwater Print Sales, Teaching and Stock Library
    www.cognitas.org.uk - Improving Safety by Challenging Current Practices
    www.divingincidents.org - Diving Incident and Safety Management System (DISMS)
    - 2014 Report here

    “Set your expectations high; find men and women whose integrity and values you respect; get their agreement on a course of action; and give them your ultimate trust.”

    “It is far better to be trusted and respected than it is to be liked.”

  3. #3
    New TDF Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    22
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    1
    If it helps save other lives then I'd say go ahead. Also, if one person sees a report then mentions it to someone else and doesn't quite tell the 'reported' story correctly then it can start getting a bit like Chinese whispers.

  4. #4
    TDF Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    403
    Likes (Given)
    362
    Likes (Received)
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by double_dd View Post
    If it helps save other lives then I'd say go ahead. Also, if one person sees a report then mentions it to someone else and doesn't quite tell the 'reported' story correctly then it can start getting a bit like Chinese whispers.
    I agree, but it all depends on the quality or otherwise of the report or maybe that's for the reader to decide?

  5. #5
    Established TDF Member turnerjd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,036
    Likes (Given)
    1354
    Likes (Received)
    845
    I have had a think about this, and I had a look back through the Information-Donor-A-bit-like-Organ-Donors-but-Important-to-Divers thread.

    I think that the general opinion from the Information-Donor thread is that the maximum should be learned from our mistakes. There has to be a counterbalance between confidentiality and accuracy, and I think that for this type of accident analysis a lot more is gained by collating data, and correctly associating press reports, coroners reports etc with confidential accident reports. At the worst what we gain is a clearer picture of how many accidents happen, and at the best, we can avoid the 'Chinease whispers' of stories that get twisted with every telling. If I were to monumentally screw up whilst diving, I would much rather that people had access to the correct data.

    If we lose our confidentiality because media reports are included, I can't see the majority of divers having a problem. Most would, I suspect prefer accuracy of the available information to draw the correct lessons.....

    Jon

    Edited to add- could you not have an 'anonymity waiver' when somebody reports an incident, with an explicit agreement to your attaching press reports and other more official I.e. Coroners reports to the incident in the database? - this is what we do for some of our clinical research - we explain that we will be doing further research on the same target population, and ask participants permission to keep all nominative and contact data for their potential participation in future studies. This breaks the anonymity chain, but has been ethically (and data protection) approved, and almost every participant accepts it.
    Last edited by turnerjd; 27-09-2014 at 07:46 AM.


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •