ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2014
Guidelines for the ethical use of neuroimages in medical testimony: report of a multidisciplinary consensus conference.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Traumatic shaking: The role of the triad in medical investigations of suspected traumatic shaking.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2018Pooled it
- Forensic neurology: a distinct subspecialty at the intersection of neurology, neuroscience and law.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2024Review
- Diffusion tensor imaging in the courtroom: Distinction between scientific specificity and legally admissible evidence.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
- Neuroimaging Abnormalities in Neurological Patients with Criminal Behavior.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2018Review
- Dementia, Decision Making, and Capacity.Harvard review of psychiatryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
summaryWith rapid advances in neuroimaging technology, there is growing concern over potential misuse of neuroradiologic imaging data in legal matters. On December 7 and 8, 2012, a multidisciplinary consensus conference, Use and Abuse of Neuroimaging in the Courtroom, was held at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. Through this interactive forum, a highly select group of experts-including neuroradiologists, neurologists, forensic psychiatrists, neuropsychologists, neuroscientists, legal scholars, imaging statisticians, judges, practicing attorneys, and neuroethicists-discussed the complex issues involved in the use of neuroimaging data entered into legal evidence and for associated expert testimony. The specific contexts of criminal cases, child abuse, and head trauma were especially considered. The purpose of the conference was to inform the development of guidelines on expert testimony for the American Society of Neuroradiology and to provide principles for courts on the ethical use of neuroimaging data as evidence. This report summarizes the conference and resulting recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.