Search

Introduction: Most findings of forensic pathology examinations are presented as written reports. There are currently no internationally accepted recommendations for writing forensic pathology reports. Existing recommendations are also varied and reflect the differences in the scope and role of forensic medical services and local settings in which they are to be implemented. The legal fact-finder thus faces wide variation in the quality of forensic pathology reports, which poses a threat to the reliability of legal decision-making. To address this issue, the development of the “PERFORM-P (Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version)” was undertaken. The goal of the PERFORM-P is to provide common practice recommendations adaptable to local requirements to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in forensic pathology. Methods: An international consensus study was conducted in three phases by (1) developing a long-list of items to be considered in the reporting recommendations, (2) conducting a Delphi process (an iterative survey method to transform individual opinions into group consensus) with international forensic pathologists, and (3) designing the PERFORM-P prototype and its accompanying manual. Results: With assistance from 106 forensic pathologists/forensic medical practitioners from 41 countries, the PERFORM-P was developed. The PERFORM-P consists of a list of 61 items to be included in a forensic pathology report, which is accompanied by its Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. Discussion: To prepare forensic pathology (postmortem) reports that incorporate principles of evidence-based practice, internationally accepted recommendations might be helpful. The PERFORM-P identifies recommendations for necessary elements to include in a forensic pathology report. PERFORM-P can be applied to a wide range of matters requiring forensic pathological analysis, acceptable to forensic pathologists from a representative selection o

Introduction: Most findings of forensic pathology examinations are presented as written reports. There are currently no internationally accepted recommendations for writing forensic pathology reports. Existing recommendations are also varied and reflect the differences in the scope and role of forensic medical services and local settings in which they are to be implemented. The legal fact-finder thus faces wide variation in the quality of forensic pathology reports, which poses a threat to the reliability of legal decision-making. To address this issue, the development of the “PERFORM-P (Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version)” was undertaken. The goal of the PERFORM-P is to provide common practice recommendations adaptable to local requirements to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in forensic pathology. Methods: An international consensus study was conducted in three phases by (1) developing a long-list of items to be considered in the reporting recommendations, (2) conducting a Delphi process (an iterative survey method to transform individual opinions into group consensus) with international forensic pathologists, and (3) designing the PERFORM-P prototype and its accompanying manual. Results: With assistance from 106 forensic pathologists/forensic medical practitioners from 41 countries, the PERFORM-P was developed. The PERFORM-P consists of a list of 61 items to be included in a forensic pathology report, which is accompanied by its Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. Discussion: To prepare forensic pathology (postmortem) reports that incorporate principles of evidence-based practice, internationally accepted recommendations might be helpful. The PERFORM-P identifies recommendations for necessary elements to include in a forensic pathology report. PERFORM-P can be applied to a wide range of matters requiring forensic pathological analysis, acceptable to forensic pathologists from a representative selection o

Introduction: Most findings of forensic pathology examinations are presented as written reports. There are currently no internationally accepted recommendations for writing forensic pathology reports. Existing recommendations are also varied and reflect the differences in the scope and role of forensic medical services and local settings in which they are to be implemented. The legal fact-finder thus faces wide variation in the quality of forensic pathology reports, which poses a threat to the reliability of legal decision-making. To address this issue, the development of the “PERFORM-P (Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version)” was undertaken. The goal of the PERFORM-P is to provide common practice recommendations adaptable to local requirements to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in forensic pathology. Methods: An international consensus study was conducted in three phases by (1) developing a long-list of items to be considered in the reporting recommendations, (2) conducting a Delphi process (an iterative survey method to transform individual opinions into group consensus) with international forensic pathologists, and (3) designing the PERFORM-P prototype and its accompanying manual. Results: With assistance from 106 forensic pathologists/forensic medical practitioners from 41 countries, the PERFORM-P was developed. The PERFORM-P consists of a list of 61 items to be included in a forensic pathology report, which is accompanied by its Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. Discussion: To prepare forensic pathology (postmortem) reports that incorporate principles of evidence-based practice, internationally accepted recommendations might be helpful. The PERFORM-P identifies recommendations for necessary elements to include in a forensic pathology report. PERFORM-P can be applied to a wide range of matters requiring forensic pathological analysis, acceptable to forensic pathologists from a representative selection o

Introduction: Most findings of forensic pathology examinations are presented as written reports. There are currently no internationally accepted recommendations for writing forensic pathology reports. Existing recommendations are also varied and reflect the differences in the scope and role of forensic medical services and local settings in which they are to be implemented. The legal fact-finder thus faces wide variation in the quality of forensic pathology reports, which poses a threat to the reliability of legal decision-making. To address this issue, the development of the “PERFORM-P (Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version)” was undertaken. The goal of the PERFORM-P is to provide common practice recommendations adaptable to local requirements to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in forensic pathology. Methods: An international consensus study was conducted in three phases by (1) developing a long-list of items to be considered in the reporting recommendations, (2) conducting a Delphi process (an iterative survey method to transform individual opinions into group consensus) with international forensic pathologists, and (3) designing the PERFORM-P prototype and its accompanying manual. Results: With assistance from 106 forensic pathologists/forensic medical practitioners from 41 countries, the PERFORM-P was developed. The PERFORM-P consists of a list of 61 items to be included in a forensic pathology report, which is accompanied by its Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. Discussion: To prepare forensic pathology (postmortem) reports that incorporate principles of evidence-based practice, internationally accepted recommendations might be helpful. The PERFORM-P identifies recommendations for necessary elements to include in a forensic pathology report. PERFORM-P can be applied to a wide range of matters requiring forensic pathological analysis, acceptable to forensic pathologists from a representative selection o

Introduction: Most findings of forensic pathology examinations are presented as written reports. There are currently no internationally accepted recommendations for writing forensic pathology reports. Existing recommendations are also varied and reflect the differences in the scope and role of forensic medical services and local settings in which they are to be implemented. The legal fact-finder thus faces wide variation in the quality of forensic pathology reports, which poses a threat to the reliability of legal decision-making. To address this issue, the development of the “PERFORM-P (Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version)” was undertaken. The goal of the PERFORM-P is to provide common practice recommendations adaptable to local requirements to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in forensic pathology. Methods: An international consensus study was conducted in three phases by (1) developing a long-list of items to be considered in the reporting recommendations, (2) conducting a Delphi process (an iterative survey method to transform individual opinions into group consensus) with international forensic pathologists, and (3) designing the PERFORM-P prototype and its accompanying manual. Results: With assistance from 106 forensic pathologists/forensic medical practitioners from 41 countries, the PERFORM-P was developed. The PERFORM-P consists of a list of 61 items to be included in a forensic pathology report, which is accompanied by its Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. Discussion: To prepare forensic pathology (postmortem) reports that incorporate principles of evidence-based practice, internationally accepted recommendations might be helpful. The PERFORM-P identifies recommendations for necessary elements to include in a forensic pathology report. PERFORM-P can be applied to a wide range of matters requiring forensic pathological analysis, acceptable to forensic pathologists from a representative selection o

Serious head and neck injuries are a common finding in fatalities associated with rollover crashes. In some fatal rollover crashes, particularly when ejection occurs, the determination of which occupant was driving at the time of the crash may be uncertain. In the present investigation, we describe the analysis of rollover crash data from the National Automotive Sampling System-Crashworthiness Data System for the years 1997 through 2007 in which we examined the relationship between a serious head and neck injury in an occupant and a specified degree of roof deformation at theoccupant's seating position. We found 960 occupants who qualified for the analysis, with 142 deaths among the subjects. Using a ranked compositehead and neck injury score (the HNISS) we found a strong relationship between HNISS and the degree of roof crush. As a result of the analysis, we arrived at a predictive model, in which each additional unit increase in HNISS equated to an increased odds of roof crush as follows: for ≥8cm of roof crush compared with <8cm by 4%, for ≥15cm of roof crush compared to <8cm by 6% and for ≥30cm of roof crush compared to <8cm by 11%. We describe two hypothetical scenarios in which the model could be applied to the real world investigation of occupant position in a rollover crash-related fatality.