Establishing Tap Reliability in Expert Witness Testimony: Using Scenarios to Identify Calibration Needs

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara E. Endicott-Popovsky ◽  
J.D. Fluckiger ◽  
Deborah A. Frincke
Keyword(s):  
Expert Witness ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony

Regulating Physician Expert Witness Testimony

JAMA ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 299 (14) ◽  
pp. 1667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Larriviere
Keyword(s):  
Expert Witness ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony

The Irresponsible Expert Witness: A Failure of Biomedical Graduate Education and Professional Accountability

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 70 (5) ◽  
pp. 754-762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Brent
Keyword(s):  
Expert Witness ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony ◽  
Professional Accountability ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
And Function

Many forces have created the epidemic of negligence and malpractice litigation. One of the contributing factors to the rising rate of nonmeritorious litigation is the increasing number of unqualified and irresponsible expert witnesses. The high remuneration has attracted physican-scientists who are unaware of the proper role of an expert witness. They are frequently manipulated by the attorneys and function as partisans rather than scholars. The role of the expert witness should be taught in medical and graduate school. Testimony should be treated as a scholarly endeavor and experts should be encouraged to seek peer review of their opinions and not to testify secretly and in isolation. It is suggested that greater visibility of experts and their testimony (light of day phenomenon) should raise the quality of expert witness testimony and encourage more qualified experts to participate as expert witnesses, thus removing the stigmata usually associated with unqualified expert witnesses.

Guidelines for Expert Witness Testimony in Medical Malpractice Litigation

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 109 (5) ◽  
pp. 974-979
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony ◽  
Private Citizens ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
Equitable Outcomes

The interests of the public and the medical profession are best served when scientifically sound and unbiased expert witness testimony is readily available to plaintiffs and defendants in medical negligence suits. As members of the physician community, as patient advocates, and as private citizens, pediatricians have ethical and professional obligations to assist in the administration of justice, particularly in matters concerning potential medical malpractice. The American Academy of Pediatrics believes that the adoption of the recommendations outlined in this statement will improve the quality of medical expert witness testimony in such proceedings and thereby increase the probability of achieving equitable outcomes. Strategies to enforce ethical guidelines should be monitored for efficacy before offering policy recommendations on disciplining physicians for providing biased, false, or unscientific medical expert witness testimony.

Social Science Expert Witness Testimony in Voting Rights Cases

2017 ◽  
pp. 97-120
Author(s):  
Richard L. Engstrom ◽  
Daniel McCool ◽  
Jorge Chapa ◽  
Gerald R. Webster
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Voting Rights ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony

Comparison of plaintiff and defendant expert witness qualification in malpractice litigation in neurological surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 120 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Anderson Eloy ◽  
Peter F. Svider ◽  
Adam J. Folbe ◽  
William T. Couldwell ◽  
James K. Liu
Keyword(s):  
Expert Witness ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness Testimony ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Scholarly Impact ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Neurological Surgery

Object Expert witnesses provide a valuable societal service, interpreting complex pieces of evidence that may be misunderstood by nonmedical laypersons. The role of medical expert witness testimony and the potential professional repercussions, however, have been controversial in the medical community. The objective of the present analysis was to characterize the expertise of neurological surgeons testifying as expert witnesses in malpractice litigation. Methods Malpractice litigation involving expert testimony from neurological surgeons was obtained using the WestlawNext legal database. Data pertaining to duration of a surgeon's practice, scholarly impact (as measured by the h index), practice setting, and the frequency with which a surgeon testifies were obtained for these expert witnesses from various online resources including the Scopus database, online medical facility and practice sites, and state medical licensing boards. Results Neurological surgeons testifying in 326 cases since 2008 averaged over 30 years of experience per person (34.5 years for plaintiff witnesses vs 33.2 for defense witnesses, p = 0.35). Defense witnesses had statistically higher scholarly impact than plaintiff witnesses (h index = 8.76 vs 5.46, p < 0.001). A greater proportion of defense witnesses were involved in academic practice (46.1% vs 24.4%, p < 0.001). Those testifying on behalf of plaintiffs were more likely to testify multiple times than those testifying on behalf of defendants (20.4% vs 12.6%). Conclusions Practitioners testifying for either side tend to be very experienced, while those testifying on behalf of defendants have significantly higher scholarly impact and are more likely to practice in an academic setting, potentially indicating a greater level of expertise. Experts for plaintiffs were more likely to testify multiple times. Surgical societies may need to clarify the necessary qualifications and ethical responsibilities of those who choose to testify.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document