Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Medical examiner variability

R Hinchcliffe1

  • 1Division of Audiological Medicine, Institute of Laryngology and Otology, University College London Medical School, UK.

The Journal of Laryngology and Otology
|January 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Hearing conservation.

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine·2010
Same author

Is there still a consensus on impairment, disability and handicap in audiology?

British journal of audiology·1999
Same author

WHO and its role in the prevention of deafness and hearing impairment.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·1997
Same author

Inter-examiner variability.

Medicine and law·1997
Same author

[Hypoacusis and tinnitus: an overview].

Revue de laryngologie - otologie - rhinologie·1993
Same author

Calcium and magnesium mass transfer in peritoneal dialysis patients using 1.25 mmol/L calcium, 0.25 mmol/L magnesium dialysis fluid.

Peritoneal dialysis international : journal of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis·1993
Same journal

Audiological Outcomes in 465 Primary Myringoplasties: Reporting Pitfalls and Lessons Learned.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
Same journal

Design and technical validation of a low-cost, titanium sheet metal TORP (SM-T) for manufacturing and use in LMICs- ERRATUM.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
Same journal

Evaluating Long-term Recurrence of Cholesteatoma Following Primary Surgery: An Umbrella Review of Surgical Techniques and Patient Factors.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
Same journal

Tinnitus burden in patients with chronic suppurative otitis media undergoing surgery in Nepal: a cross-sectional study.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
Same journal

Microbiological findings in persistent otologic infections in a community otolaryngology clinic: a retrospective case series.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
Same journal

Septal melanoma: does surgical excision confer a potential survival benefit? A single centre's experience and literature review.

The Journal of laryngology and otology·2026
See all related articles

Medical examiner variability in hearing disorder claims may stem from inconsistent training. Specializing examiners for medicolegal work could improve consistency and reduce litigation challenges.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Law
  • Audiology
  • Forensic Medicine

Background:

  • Inter-examiner variability is a significant issue in medicolegal assessments.
  • Hearing disorder claims are particularly susceptible to variability among medical practitioners.
  • Current training and role perception of medical examiners may contribute to inconsistencies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the sources of inter-examiner variability in medicolegal assessments, specifically for hearing disorders.
  • To explore potential solutions for enhancing the consistency and reliability of medical expert opinions in legal contexts.

Main Methods:

  • Tentative analysis of medical examination papers.
  • Review of the declared roles and specializations of medical examiners in justiciable matters.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Literature review on specialized training for medicolegal work.

    • Main Results:

    • Training and 'calibration' of medical examiners appear to be a potential source of variability.
    • Analysis supports the thesis that specialized training could mitigate inconsistencies.
    • The litigation process itself presents challenges to expert interaction and consensus.

    Conclusions:

    • Specialized training programs for medicolegal examiners are recommended.
    • A shift in role perception and emphasis on unbiased opinions are crucial for medical experts.
    • Addressing inherent litigation process issues is necessary for improving expert collaboration.