ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
A cross-sectional study on knowledge of registered medical practitioners, regarding management of medico-legal cases in Meghalaya.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Medico-legal issues are handled by every registered medical practitioner in their day-to-day medical practice but if they are not well versed with rules of managing such cases and laws behind them, they often land into criticism and are distressed at the courts while disposing of the cases. Objective: To assess the knowledge of registered medical practitioners in Meghalaya regarding the management of medico-legal cases in day-to-day medical practices. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study, conducted at the Department of Forensic Medicine, North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Sciences (NEIGRIHMS) for 6 months. The study group included registered medical practitioners working in the government sector who were approached through the Director of Health Services (DHS), Meghalaya. Study tools included one preformed and pretested questionnaire. Knowledge was assessed along with designation and years of experience. A Results: From 94 subjects analyzed for their answers, 56% had adequate knowledge. Amongst nonspecialist doctors (n = 53), 52.8% had adequate knowledge and amongst specialist doctors (n = 34), 67.6% had adequate knowledge in various aspects of management of medico-legal cases, and it was found that 6.4% had adequate knowledge in documentation, 21.2% in consent, 3.2% in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 71.2% in autopsy, 88.2% in legal duties in emergency care. A total of 68.7% of those having 16-20 years of experience had adequate knowledge. Chi-square test of designation and years of experience on knowledge was found to be 0.33 and 0.75, respectively. Conclusion: Nearly half of the registered medical practitioners of Meghalaya have adequate knowledge. However, years of experience and designation have no significance with the knowledge of registered medical practitioners regarding the management of medico-legal issues.
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.