TY - JOUR
T1 - The Role of the Expert Witness in Radiology
T2 - Challenges and Strategies for Overcoming Them
AU - Waite, Stephen
AU - Scott, Jinel
AU - Kolla, Srinivas
AU - Bruno, Michael A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American College of Radiology
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Expert witnesses provide an important service in malpractice cases in the United States because they educate the jury on the standards of care relevant to a particular case. In cases in which the defendant physician is a radiologist, the decision often rests on whether a retrospectively detected abnormality should have been perceived and reported, an “error of omission.” Errors of omission are usually termed “perceptual” in the literature and are the most common cause of malpractice suits in radiology. Allegations often hinge on whether these errors represent a breach of duty by the defendant radiologist and whether they resulted in an injury to the plaintiff or patient. In short, jurors are asked to decide if the radiologist performed below the “standard of care,” generally defined as that which a minimally competent, reasonable, or ordinary physician in the same field would do under similar circumstances. The authors describe challenges associated with being an expert witness and provide guidance to radiologists on how to address cases involving alleged perceptual errors.
AB - Expert witnesses provide an important service in malpractice cases in the United States because they educate the jury on the standards of care relevant to a particular case. In cases in which the defendant physician is a radiologist, the decision often rests on whether a retrospectively detected abnormality should have been perceived and reported, an “error of omission.” Errors of omission are usually termed “perceptual” in the literature and are the most common cause of malpractice suits in radiology. Allegations often hinge on whether these errors represent a breach of duty by the defendant radiologist and whether they resulted in an injury to the plaintiff or patient. In short, jurors are asked to decide if the radiologist performed below the “standard of care,” generally defined as that which a minimally competent, reasonable, or ordinary physician in the same field would do under similar circumstances. The authors describe challenges associated with being an expert witness and provide guidance to radiologists on how to address cases involving alleged perceptual errors.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088942818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85088942818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.06.007
DO - 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.06.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 32628901
AN - SCOPUS:85088942818
SN - 1546-1440
VL - 18
SP - 318
EP - 323
JO - Journal of the American College of Radiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Radiology
IS - 2
ER -