Recipient

Informa Healthcare

Pin Request correction

First report 20 Aug 2020•Latest report 20 Aug 2020

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Informa Healthcare linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. County Durham and Darlington

    AI-generated summary

    Viktor John Anthony Scott-Brown · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Viktor John Anthony Scott-Brown, aged 23, was found hanging at his home overnight on 14/15 December 2018 and pronounced dead at the scene; the inquest concluded that his death was suicide. He had been prescribed Lamotrigine without being warned about its potential association with thoughts of self-harm or suicide, and concerns were raised that reputable prescribing resources were inconsistent or silent about this potential side effect.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Informa Healthcare; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Omission of Lamotrigine self-harm or suicide risk from pharmacological information resources

    Wider context from the report

    “Mr Scott-Brown was prescribed Lamotrigine by an NHS Foundation Trust Consultant Psychiatrist. The prescribing consultant did not give Mr Scott-Brown a Trust information sheet about Lamotrigine and a Patient Information Leaflet about Lamotrigine from the drug manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline. It was common ground that the consultant should have done so. Both documents record as a side effect of using Lamotrigine a risk that the patient may begin to experience thoughts of self-harm or suicide. Mr Scott-Brown was never given that information. The consultant gave evidence that he was not aware of that particular side effect of Lamotrigine, and that his prescribing practice was informed by the British National Formulary and The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines. Neither the online BNF viewable via the NICE website nor the 10th Edition of The Maudsley Guidelines (to which the court was referred) refer to that side effect in their respective entries for Lamotrigine. Subsequent to the conclusion of the Inquest, I have learned from the Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust that when Mr Scott-Brown was prescribed Lamotrigine, then the current edition of the Maudsley Guidelines was the 13th Edition. The Inquest heard no evidence about the 13th Edition of the Maudsley Guidelines and information therein concerning Lamotrigine. Quite apart from any issue regarding the consultant’s knowledge about Lamotrigine (and the existence of the 13th Edition of the Maudsley Guidelines) and his not having given Mr Scott-Brown the Trust’s prepared information about the drug and its side effects, I am concerned that two obviously reputable sources of pharmacological information are apparently silent, or have been silent, on a potentially significant side effect of this particular drug. From a lay perspective, there is apparent potential for harm to patients depending upon which resources a prescriber consults before prescribing Lamotrigine. That potential for harm might be ameliorated were the advice about Lamotrigine consistent across all such resources. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Informa Healthcare; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide patients with information about Lamotrigine side effects

    Wider context from the report

    “Mr Scott-Brown was prescribed Lamotrigine by an NHS Foundation Trust Consultant Psychiatrist. The prescribing consultant did not give Mr Scott-Brown a Trust information sheet about Lamotrigine and a Patient Information Leaflet about Lamotrigine from the drug manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline. It was common ground that the consultant should have done so. Both documents record as a side effect of using Lamotrigine a risk that the patient may begin to experience thoughts of self-harm or suicide. Mr Scott-Brown was never given that information. The consultant gave evidence that he was not aware of that particular side effect of Lamotrigine, and that his prescribing practice was informed by the British National Formulary and The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines. Neither the online BNF viewable via the NICE website nor the 10th Edition of The Maudsley Guidelines (to which the court was referred) refer to that side effect in their respective entries for Lamotrigine. Subsequent to the conclusion of the Inquest, I have learned from the Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust that when Mr Scott-Brown was prescribed Lamotrigine, then the current edition of the Maudsley Guidelines was the 13th Edition. The Inquest heard no evidence about the 13th Edition of the Maudsley Guidelines and information therein concerning Lamotrigine. Quite apart from any issue regarding the consultant’s knowledge about Lamotrigine (and the existence of the 13th Edition of the Maudsley Guidelines) and his not having given Mr Scott-Brown the Trust’s prepared information about the drug and its side effects, I am concerned that two obviously reputable sources of pharmacological information are apparently silent, or have been silent, on a potentially significant side effect of this particular drug. From a lay perspective, there is apparent potential for harm to patients depending upon which resources a prescriber consults before prescribing Lamotrigine. That potential for harm might be ameliorated were the advice about Lamotrigine consistent across all such resources. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026