SynthesisInternational journal of legal medicine2020
Medico-legal assessment of personal damage in older people: report from a multidisciplinary consensus conference.
Synthesis in International journal of legal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Leg Length Discrepancy After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Review of Clinical Assessments, Imaging Diagnostics, and Medico-Legal Implications.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Geriatric nursing competence of clinical nursing staff at different hospital levels in Chongqing, China: A cross-sectional study.International journal of nursing sciences · 2024Article
- Children's outcomes in road traffic accidents: challenges for personal injury assessment.Forensic sciences research · 2023Article
- Are There Any Differences in Road Traffic Injury Outcomes between Older and Younger Adults? Setting the Grounds for Posttraumatic Senior Personal Injury Assessment Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Validation of the German Version of the Moral Injury Symptom and Support Scale for Health Professionals (G-MISS-HP) and Its Correlation to the Second Victim Phenomenon.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Volunteer activity and depression among the elderly in China: A study on rural-urban differences.Medicine · 2021Article
- Person-Centered Care Practice, Patient Safety Competence, and Patient Safety Nursing Activities of Nurses Working in Geriatric Hospitals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Liver resection for colorectal liver-limited metastases in elderly patients: a propensity score matching analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 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
36 authors at 17 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ageing of the global population represents a challenge for national healthcare systems and healthcare professionals, including medico-legal experts, who assess personal damage in an increasing number of older people. Personal damage evaluation in older people is complex, and the scarcity of evidence is hindering the development of formal guidelines on the subject. The main objectives of the first multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Medico-Legal Assessment of Personal Damage in Older People were to increase knowledge on the subject and establish standard procedures in this field. The conference, organized according to the guidelines issued by the Italian National Institute of Health (ISS), was held in Bologna (Italy) on June 8, 2019 with the support of national scientific societies, professional organizations, and stakeholders. The Scientific Technical Committee prepared 16 questions on 4 thematic areas: (1) differences in injury outcomes in older people compared to younger people and their relevance in personal damage assessment; (2) pre-existing status reconstruction and evaluation; (3) medico-legal examination procedures; (4) multidimensional assessment and scales. The Scientific Secretariat reviewed relevant literature and documents, rated their quality, and summarized evidence. During conference plenary public sessions, 4 pairs of experts reported on each thematic area. After the last session, a multidisciplinary Jury Panel (15 members) drafted the consensus statements. The present report describes Conference methods and results, including a summary of evidence supporting each statement, and areas requiring further investigation. The methodological recommendations issued during the Conference may be useful in several contexts of damage assessment, or to other medico-legal evaluation fields.
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.