Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2026

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts
Published on: January 29, 2018
Missed and missing cases of abusive injuries: the magnitude and the measurement of the problem
David L Chadwick1, Edward M Castillo, Cynthia Kuelbs
1The Chadwick Center for Children and Families, Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego, 4816 Rushville Lane, La Mesa, San Diego, CA, USA.
Insights
Inflicted childhood injuries have a 6-14 fold higher case-fatality rate (CFR) than unintentional injuries. This disparity highlights underdiagnosis and the need for better public health definitions for child abuse.
Area of Science:
- Pediatrics
- Public Health
- Forensic Medicine
Background:
- Childhood injuries present a significant public health challenge.
- Distinguishing between inflicted and unintentional injuries is crucial for appropriate medical and legal responses.
- Existing ascertainment methods for inflicted injuries may be insufficient.
Purpose of the Study:
- To quantify the disparity in case-fatality rates (CFRs) between inflicted and unintentional childhood injuries.
- To evaluate the utility of CFR disparity in estimating the accuracy of identifying inflicted injuries.
- To advocate for improved public health case definitions for inflicted injuries.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of four injury databases containing hospitalized injury cases.
- Determination and comparison of CFRs for inflicted versus unintentional injuries.
- Examination of the relationship between CFR disparity and the incidence of inflicted injuries.
Main Results:
- A substantial case-fatality rate disparity (6-14 fold) was observed between inflicted and unintentional injuries across databases.
- The CFR disparity was inversely related to the reported incidence of inflicted injuries.
- Higher CFRs for inflicted injuries suggest underascertainment and misdiagnosis.
Conclusions:
- A significant gap exists in identifying inflicted childhood injuries, evidenced by higher CFRs compared to unintentional injuries.
- Current forensic-driven diagnostic criteria are too restrictive for public health surveillance.
- Development of public health-oriented case definitions is essential for accurate identification and prevention of inflicted injuries.
- Interventions targeting injury recidivism in children are necessary components of injury prevention strategies.
Objective:
The authors' objective is to describe the disparity between the case-fatality rates for inflicted versus unintentional injuries of children, and to emphasize its utility as a way of estimating the effectiveness of the ascertainment of inflicted injuries of children.
Method:
Determination, comparison, and explanation of the case-fatality-rate disparity in four injury databases were derived from hospitalized injury cases.
Results:
The CFR disparity is 6-14-fold in the 4 injury databases. The CFR disparity varies strongly and inversely with the observed incidence of inflicted injuries in the databases.
Conclusions:
A large disparity between the case fatality rates (CFRs) of inflicted and unintentional injuries exists in a number of injury databases. Inflicted injuries have much higher CFRs than unintentional injuries. The disparity can be accounted for by "missed" (incorrectly diagnosed) and "missing" (unseen) cases.
Practice Implications:
Present diagnostic criteria for physically abusive (inflicted) injuries are forensically-driven and too conservative for public health purposes. New public-health-oriented case definitions for "inflicted injury" are needed. Programs to reduce injury recidivism in young children should be a part of overall injury prevention.
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Analysis: Overview
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
Prevalence and Incidence
Prevalence indicates the proportion of individuals in a population who have a specific disease or health condition at a...
Bystander Effect

