The evaluation of medical malpractice claims: Creating a Standard Approach Model Using the Delphi Method

Area of Science:

• Forensic Science
• Health Law
• Medical Law

Background:

• Medical malpractice claims have risen globally, prompting debate on the 'standard of care' in legal and health law contexts.
• Expert opinions are crucial in medical malpractice cases, but approaches and procedures vary, necessitating a standardized evaluation method.
• Objective assessment of evidence is vital for determining liability in medical malpractice claims.

Purpose of the Study:

• To establish a standardized, objective, and scientific evaluation method for medical malpractice claims.
• To create an algorithm to aid judicial authorities in evaluating expert opinions.
• To provide a minimum common denominator for a standard approach model for experts assessing medical malpractice.

Main Methods:

• The Delphi method was employed to gather free and independent opinions from panelists.
• A panel of 11 experts, including forensic medicine specialists, clinicians, and a lawyer, participated.
• Data was collected between January 2017 and September 2017.

Main Results:

• The research facilitated the expression of diverse expert opinions on evaluating medical malpractice.
• A framework was developed to guide experts in assessing the standard of care.
• The study aimed to ensure methodological, logical, and scientifically valid evaluations.

Conclusions:

• The developed standard approach model is expected to enhance the objectivity and consistency of expert evaluations in medical malpractice claims.
• This research impacts the forensic science and law communities by promoting scientifically valid and objective assessments.
• The findings will contribute to a more standardized determination of whether healthcare professionals meet the expected minimum standard of care.