Anne Dyson
PFD Report
All Responded
Ref: 2025-0439
All 1 response received
· Deadline: 21 Oct 2025
Coroner's Concerns (AI summary)
Radiologists receive inconsistent and limited patient information, often focused to specific areas, risking confirmation bias and delayed diagnoses by restricting comprehensive scan interpretation.
View full coroner's concerns
Page 2 of 2
The evidence revealed that when Radiologists are asked to interpret a scan, the information they are provided with varies in quality and level of detail, and there is no consistent approach, with Radiologists often having to create their own medical history from previous scans and reports, if any have been undertaken.
I am concerned that the evidence was that such requests for interpretation are often focused to a specific area of concern with a limited background history provided, and that this can lead to confirmation bias or satisfaction of search by the Radiologist when providing a report.
The evidence indicated that Radiologists are not provided with a list or a summary of a patient’s symptoms or health complaints which resulted in the scan being commissioned, nor are they provided with details of any new or changed symptoms that have occurred during the investigative period.
I am concerned that this has the potential to restrict the focus of the interpreter resulting in only limited aspects of the scan being interpreted - not the whole of the scan, meaning that potential diagnosis and treatment can then be significantly delayed, if something is missed.
I shall be glad to be told of any learning arising from this death and timescales and results of your review.
The evidence revealed that when Radiologists are asked to interpret a scan, the information they are provided with varies in quality and level of detail, and there is no consistent approach, with Radiologists often having to create their own medical history from previous scans and reports, if any have been undertaken.
I am concerned that the evidence was that such requests for interpretation are often focused to a specific area of concern with a limited background history provided, and that this can lead to confirmation bias or satisfaction of search by the Radiologist when providing a report.
The evidence indicated that Radiologists are not provided with a list or a summary of a patient’s symptoms or health complaints which resulted in the scan being commissioned, nor are they provided with details of any new or changed symptoms that have occurred during the investigative period.
I am concerned that this has the potential to restrict the focus of the interpreter resulting in only limited aspects of the scan being interpreted - not the whole of the scan, meaning that potential diagnosis and treatment can then be significantly delayed, if something is missed.
I shall be glad to be told of any learning arising from this death and timescales and results of your review.
Responses
Action Taken
South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust has shared learning with radiologists about the importance of thorough searches, awareness of confirmation bias, and comparing prior relevant imaging. They are updating induction training and developing a Standard Operating Procedure with 4Ways for radiology reporting. (AI summary)
South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust has shared learning with radiologists about the importance of thorough searches, awareness of confirmation bias, and comparing prior relevant imaging. They are updating induction training and developing a Standard Operating Procedure with 4Ways for radiology reporting. (AI summary)
View full response
Dear I \ Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths - Mrs Anne Lorraine Dyson I write in response to your Report to Prevent Future Deaths, dated 26 August2025, following the sad death of Anne Dyson. I note that your concerns in this matter relate to processes around sharing relevant clinical information with Radiologists and the potential impact this has on the interpretation of imaging As a Trust we have taken Anne Dyson's death very seriously and as you heard at the inquest, we:have taken steps to share the identified learning with relevant Radiologists within the Trust, highlighting the importance of Radiologists being satisfied with the extent of their search, being aware of the risk of confirmation bias and the importance of comparing prior qelevant' imag ing, where appropriate. Followiirg receipt of your Report to Prevent Future Deaths, the Trust has reviewed existing radiology processes, in liaison with 4Ways, who are an external iadiology repgrting partner of the Trust, to consider how we can strengthen current processes both internally and externally The Trust's Radiology department is working to update Trust induction training to emphasise key clinical details which must be consistently included in radiology requests to ensure the safe and accurate reporting of these exams. To deliver this a work instruction will be developed which will detail the required standard of clinical information required for radiology examinations to proceed. This will also be supported by a Trust wide corhmunication to update current staff members and there will be a regular audit of these standards, completed by the Trust's Radiology department, to ensure compliance, with feedback provided to individuals and whole directorates as appropriate. ellence .{ in all that we do
A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is also being developed between the Trust and 4Ways, which is currently going through internal review and sign off, to provide a more clearly defined clinical process for both Trust and 4Ways Radiologists, around the reporting of images to ensure that there is a consistent approach amongst clinicians, with them being aware of their own responsibilities. As part of this SOP, clinicians are reminded of the need, where clinically relevant, to compare previous imaging, with the requirement to now include reference to either a new finding or mark that no other changes are noted, to make it clear that a comparison of relevant images has taken place. I hope that the above addresses your concerns, but please do revert back to me should you have any further comments or queries that I can assist with.
A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is also being developed between the Trust and 4Ways, which is currently going through internal review and sign off, to provide a more clearly defined clinical process for both Trust and 4Ways Radiologists, around the reporting of images to ensure that there is a consistent approach amongst clinicians, with them being aware of their own responsibilities. As part of this SOP, clinicians are reminded of the need, where clinically relevant, to compare previous imaging, with the requirement to now include reference to either a new finding or mark that no other changes are noted, to make it clear that a comparison of relevant images has taken place. I hope that the above addresses your concerns, but please do revert back to me should you have any further comments or queries that I can assist with.
Sent To
- South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust
Response Status
Linked responses
1 of 1
56-Day Deadline
21 Oct 2025
All responses received
About PFD responses
Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.
Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
On 7th March 2025 I commenced an Investigation into the death of Mrs Anne Lorraine Dyson, who died in St Benedict’s Hospice, Sunderland on 24th February 2025 aged 68 years. The Investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on 15th August 2025.
I gave a conclusion ‘Natural causes contributed to by neglect.’
The medical cause of death was: - Ia Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (Metastatic)
I gave a conclusion ‘Natural causes contributed to by neglect.’
The medical cause of death was: - Ia Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (Metastatic)
Circumstances of the Death
Anne Lorraine Dyson died at St Benedict's hospice on 24th February 2025 having been diagnosed with metastatic lung cancer on 20th November 2024 despite being under investigation for lung disease since September 2021 and scans showing an increased growth from October 2023. An incorrect interpretation of a CT scan of 25th March 2024 led to a significant delay of many months in diagnosing a malignancy which had progressed to be terminal and could no longer be successfully treated.
Copies Sent To
4 Ways and their Solicitors and Counsel
Care Quality Commission
Similar PFD Reports
Reports sharing organisations, categories, or themes
Related Inquiry Recommendations
Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes
Medical record keeping
Vale of Leven Inquiry
Inaccurate and inaccessible patient records
Clinical negligence harms learning
Healthcare trust risk information visibility
Southport Inquiry
Inaccurate and inaccessible patient records
Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.