Premium
Hindsight bias in medicolegal expert reports
Author(s) -
Hugh Thomas B,
Tracy G Douglas
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
medical journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1326-5377
pISSN - 0025-729X
DOI - 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04407.x
Subject(s) - hindsight bias , cornerstone , malpractice , outcome (game theory) , medline , expert opinion , actuarial science , medicine , psychology , medical emergency , law , political science , intensive care medicine , social psychology , business , economics , art , mathematical economics , visual arts
Malpractice litigation is now a substantial cost in the provision of healthcare. Despite new attitudes of Australian courts towards medical evidence, expert reports remain the cornerstone of most medical negligence cases. There is evidence that hindsight bias, which may cause the expert to simplify, trivialise and criticise retrospectively the decisions of the treating doctor, is inevitable when the expert knows there has been an adverse outcome. If possible, outcome information should be withheld from experts providing reports. If outcome information is not withheld, courts should be made aware of the probability of hindsight bias.