Forensic bitemark identification: weak foundations, exaggerated claims.

Several forensic sciences, especially of the pattern-matching kind, are increasingly seen to lack the scientific foundation needed to justify continuing admission as trial evidence. Indeed, several have been abolished in the recent past. A likely next candidate for elimination is bitemark identification. A number of DNA exonerations have occurred in recent years for individuals convicted based on erroneous bitemark identifications. Intense scientific and legal scrutiny has resulted. An important National Academies review found little scientific support for the field. The Texas Forensic Science Commission recently recommended a moratorium on the admission of bitemark expert testimony. The California Supreme Court has a case before it that could start a national dismantling of forensic odontology. This article describes the (legal) basis for the rise of bitemark identification and the (scientific) basis for its impending fall. The article explains the general logic of forensic identification, the claims of bitemark identification, and reviews relevant empirical research on bitemark identification-highlighting both the lack of research and the lack of support provided by what research does exist. The rise and possible fall of bitemark identification evidence has broader implications-highlighting the weak scientific culture of forensic science and the law's difficulty in evaluating and responding to unreliable and unscientific evidence.

Inadequacies of Physical Examination as a Cause of Medical Errors and Adverse Events: A Collection of Vignettes.

BACKGROUND: Oversights in the physical examination are a type of medical error not easily studied by chart review. They may be a major contributor to missed or delayed diagnosis, unnecessary exposure to contrast and radiation, incorrect treatment, and other adverse consequences. Our purpose was to collect vignettes of physical examination oversights and to capture the diversity of their characteristics and consequences. METHODS: A cross-sectional study using an 11-question qualitative survey for physicians was distributed electronically, with data collected from February to June of 2011. The participants were all physicians responding to e-mail or social media invitations to complete the survey. There were no limitations on geography, specialty, or practice setting. RESULTS: Of the 208 reported vignettes that met inclusion criteria, the oversight was caused by a failure to perform the physical examination in 63%; 14% reported that the correct physical examination sign was elicited but misinterpreted, whereas 11% reported that the relevant sign was missed or not sought. Consequence of the physical examination inadequacy included missed or delayed diagnosis in 76% of cases, incorrect diagnosis in 27%, unnecessary treatment in 18%, no or delayed treatment in 42%, unnecessary diagnostic cost in 25%, unnecessary exposure to radiation or contrast in 17%, and complications caused by treatments in 4%. The mode of the number of physicians missing the finding was 2, but many oversights were missed by many physicians. Most oversights took up to 5 days to identify, but 66 took longer. Special attention and skill in examining the skin and its appendages, as well as the abdomen, groin, and genitourinary area could reduce the reported oversights by half. CONCLUSIONS: Physical examination inadequacies are a preventable source of medical error, and adverse events are caused mostly by failure to perform the relevant examination.

Guns, society, and medicine.

Given the 96 incidents of firearm violence on school campuses since Sandy Hook and the ongoing toll on lives and health, the lack of relevant data and a research pipeline in this area should be anathema to all physicians.

Internal medicine residency redesign: proposal of the Internal Medicine Working Group.

Concerned with the quality of internal medicine training, many leaders in the field assembled to assess the state of the residency, evaluate the decline in interest in the specialty, and create a framework for invigorating the discipline. Although many external factors are responsible, we also found ourselves culpable: allowing senior role models to opt out of important training activities, ignoring a progressive atrophy of bedside skills, and focusing on lock-step curricula, lectures, and compiled diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. The group affirmed its commitment to a vision of internal medicine rooted in science and learned with mentors at the bedside. Key factors for new emphasis include patient-centered small group teaching, greater incorporation of clinical epidemiology and health services research, and better schedule control for trainees. Because previous proposals were weakened by lack of evidence, we propose to organize the Cooperative Educational Studies Group, a pool of training programs that will collect a common data set describing their programs, design interventions to be tested rigorously in multi-methodological approaches, and at the same time produce knowledge about high-quality practice.

Comparative effectiveness research and the psychology of medical practice: the vicissitudes of knowledge implementation.

Comparative effectiveness research should provide much-needed information about the benefits and risks of different current treatment options in the community. Taking the perspective of medical care providers, we consider many of the psychological, social and behavioural hurdles to implementation of comparative effectiveness analyses and explain why these obstacles should not be ignored.