Page Title

"Although professional literature includes occasional guidance on this task,¹ formal training is seldom provided. Generally requisite knowledge and skill are acquired informally, through experience gained in responding to requests for reports and advice from experienced colleagues."²

Experience of litigation in general tends to improve the layout and the content of medico-legal reports. Experience in court giving evidence tends to help the medical expert concentrate in subsequent reports on relevant medical issues.

17.2 There have been very few surveys on the quality of medical reports. Cornes et al.³ considered 602 reports from the files of one insurance company involving cases settled over 2 years for more than £5,000 of compensation. 400 different medical experts had been instructed. The majority [255] were consultant orthopaedic surgeons which equates to about 64%. A poor second place was occupied by neurologists [42] equating to about 10%.

17.3 Cornes et al. considered which reports complied with published criteria giving guidance on medico-legal reporting. Unfortunately they did not use the Law Society guidance. They instead used guidance given in Paul DM's article: Writing Medico-legal Reports.⁴ The results are a sad indictment of the standard of reports. For instance consider these categories:

Table of Quality of Reports

__________________________________________________________________

Requirement Performance in %

State age of Claimant 76%

Claimant's hobbies 26%

Claimant's occupation 74%

Consultant's qualifications 88%