ArticleJournal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America2026
Characterization of Orthopaedic Surgeon Expert Witnesses in Pediatric Orthopaedic Malpractice Litigation: A Multi-Decade Analysis.
Article in Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Expert witness (EW) testimony is central to malpractice adjudication. Pediatric orthopaedics presents unique medicolegal considerations yet EW characteristics in this domain remain poorly defined. This study aimed to characterize orthopaedic surgeon EWs in publicly available pediatric orthopaedic medical malpractice cases. Methods: A national legal database was queried for orthopaedic EWs testifying in pediatric orthopaedic malpractice cases from 1980 to 2024. An internet search and Scopus database query was conducted for each orthopaedic EW, to collect party retention (plaintiff vs defendant), fellowship training, years in practice, practice setting, Hirsch index (h-index), and public advertisement of EW services. Results: A total of 47 of 3,093 records screened met inclusion criteria. These cases involved 83 orthopaedic surgeon EWs providing 92 testimonies. Of these, 43 (51.8%) EWs were pediatric fellowship trained, accounting for 52/92 (56.5%) testimonies. Pediatric-trained EWs were more often academically affiliated (76.7% vs 40.0%, Conclusions: Orthopaedic EWs involved in pediatric malpractice cases were frequently fellowship trained, academically affiliated, and demonstrated substantial scholarly activity. Pediatric fellowship-trained EWs accounted for over half of total EWs. No significant differences between plaintiff and defense-retained EWs were identified across measured characteristics. Key Concepts: (1)Over half of all orthopaedic experts were pediatric fellowship trained.(2)Plaintiff and defense-retained expert witness did not differ significantly.(3)Presence of a pediatric-trained expert was not associated with case outcome. Level of Evidence: III, Retrospective cohort study.
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.