Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42268333›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026

Clinical Practice Guidelines in Surgical Malpractice Litigation: An Analysis of California Trial Court Orders.

E C Calabrese, J Cooks, W Babidge, M Bismark, G Maddern

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

E C CalabreseDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, Adelaide University, 4 North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia.
J CooksAdelaide Medical School, Adelaide University, 4 North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia.
W BabidgeResearch, Audit & Academic Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, 24 King William St, Kent Town, SA, 5067, Australia.
M BismarkMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
G MaddernResearch, Audit & Academic Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, 24 King William St, Kent Town, SA, 5067, Australia. guy.maddern@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2064-181X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Clinical practice guideline (CPG) development is a time- and resource-intensive process, yet their uptake may be limited by concerns among clinicians that guidelines could be used against them in malpractice cases. The role of CPGs in surgical litigation remains unclear. Aim To empirically evaluate how CPGs are used in surgical civil law and determine whether cited guidelines are surgery specific. Methods A systematic review of California Civil Trial Court Orders (Westlaw) was searched for surgery-related cases from 2021-2024. Case dockets were reviewed for guideline-based recommendations in expert testimony and in the Summary of Motion documents. Results A total of 192 cases were reviewed with eighty-three meeting inclusion criteria. CPGs were cited in three of eighty-three surgical malpractice cases (3.6 per cent), none of which were surgery specific. Conclusion CPGs appear to be rarely cited in surgical civil court cases and when referenced, they relate to non-surgical aspects of care. However, their violation may provide courts with decisive grounds for legal deliberation. Further studies evaluating a larger number of settlement cases using insurance company data would be invaluable to fully understand the role of surgical and non-surgical guidelines in shaping surgical medicolegal proceedings.

Indexed as

Civil lawClinical practice guidelinesLitigationMedical malpracticeStandard of careSurgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.