Download PDFPDF
Improving the practice of child death overview panels: a paediatric perspective
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: The value of Child Death Overview Panels (CDOP) remains unproven
    • Dr Luke Allen
    • Other Contributors:
      • Dr. Simon Lenton, Dr. James Fraser and Dr. Peter Sidebotham

    Value for money

    We endorse the sentiments expressed by Mecrow and O'Connor, and acknowledge the concerns they raise. As emphasised in our paper, there is currently a lack of evidence for the efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness of the child death review process. However, we would argue that the value of the CDOP process is not predicated on a demonstrable reduction in mortality alone.

    While demons...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    The value of Child Death Overview Panels (CDOP) remains unproven
    • ian k Mecrow, Consultant Paediatrician
    • Other Contributors:
      • Louise M O Connor

    Allen et al (1) are to be congratulated in reporting the first attempt to quantify the efficacy and impact of Child Death Overview Panels (CDOP) in the UK. They note that Paediatricians contributing to the workings of the panel are of the view that the panels function well with 71% of responders agreeing or agreeing strongly that they offer good value. However, the nature of the study may have involved significant bias as...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.