ArticleBMC research notes2015
Medical liability, defensive medicine and professional insurance in otolaryngology.
Article in BMC research notes, 2015. 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.
- How defensive medicine is defined in European medical literature: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Recurrent nerve damage following thyroid surgery: What can I do?World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Legal Medicine and Otorhinolaryngology: Related Sciences.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- Defensive medicine in Europe: a 'full circle'?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020Article
- Defensive medicine in Europe: a 'full circle'?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims at verifying relationships between the perception of medico-legal risks involved in the professional activity of Italian otolaryngologists, defensive medical behaviour and their understanding of professional liability insurance in matters of civil liability. One hundred specialists replied to a questionnaire pertaining to the psychological impact of medico-legal issues and to specific queries regarding insurance coverage, either privately stipulated or provided by the employer. Statistic analysis was carried out by χ(2) test and ANOVA multiple variance regression test, assuming P = 0.05 as the value of minimum statistical significance.
resultsIt was found that in 50% of cases the behaviour of the doctor towards the patient had been decidedly influenced by concerns over medico-legal implications. In 29% of the sample these concerns had "often to always" influenced the choice of diagnostic procedures or treatment options, in order to safeguard themselves in case of legal dispute. The data obtained showed a statistically significant correlation between the level of concern (regarding potential medico-legal disputes) experienced by specialists on the one hand and variations in the doctor/patient relationship (P < 0.05) and the choice of defensive medical procedures (P < 0.05) on the other. Furthermore, the perception of the medico-legal problem was statistically related to the absence or poor knowledge of some insurance clauses, regarding posthumous coverage (72%), informed written consent (89%), and the coverage provided by the healthcare centre where the specialist is employed (32%) (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThe results of this study indicate the necessity for a greater awareness of the actual guarantees provided by the insurance policy stipulated by specialists, to avoid inadequate coverage in the case of medico-legal disputes.
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.