ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2025
Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Injury: The Role of Expert Witness Testimony and a Recent Case Development.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2025. 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.
- Forensic Autopsy in a Long-Term Survivor of Abusive Head Trauma: An Unusual Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The triad of clinical signs, (extensive bilateral retinal haemorrhages, subdural haematoma, and encephalopathy) is regarded by some expert witnesses as pathognomonic proof that an infant was deliberately shaken and head injured (shaken baby syndrome / abusive head injury). However, that view is controversial since scientific evidence does not support the diagnostic accuracy of the triad. In contrast to previous cases, a Victorian Supreme Court jury found an accused not guilty of homicide of a one-month-old infant afflicted with the triad. Prosecution witnesses were heavily criticized for failing to provide impartial testimony and to abide by Supreme Court expert evidence rules. We argue that there is a need to reassess the manner in which expert witness testimony is considered by the courts in shaken baby cases where injury has caused the death of the infant.
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.