Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Litigation”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 757 records · Page 42Linked to original sources

The duty to counsel: reviewing a decade of litigation.

Twenty-three legal cases from the 1980s were studied. The allegation in each of these cases was that the defendant pharmacist should have done something more than correctly process a prescription to prevent harm to the patient from drug use. Four theoretical models of pharmacist legal responsibility are considered: (1) the policy-analysis model, (2) the professional-standards model, (3) the consumer-expectation model, and (4) the power model. It is concluded that the power model, based on superior knowledge and reasonable foreseeability of harm, best defines the pharmacist's legal responsibility, consistent with established legal precedents.

Humans↗

The utility of psychological testing in assessing emotional damages in personal injury litigation.

Psychological testing and assessment instruments frequently play a small but important role when psychologists assist the courts as emotional damage experts in personal injury matters. However, examiners frequently, if sometimes inadvertently, mislead the court with test interpretations that are based on clinical rather than forensic populations and that fail to appreciate the lack of robustness of clinical measures in this forensic context. Whereas published computerized interpretations repeatedly remind experts that personality test results should only be used as a method to generate hypotheses about the examinee that are to be subjected to further investigation and consideration, experts all too often inform the courts of test interpretations as if the test results were measures of clinical constructs rather than plaintiffs' self-reports of symptoms.

Expert Testimony↗

Maximizing profit and endangering health: corporate strategies to avoid litigation and regulation.

Corporations and industries use various tactics to obscure the fact that their products are dangerous or deadly. Their aim is to secure the least restrictive possible regulatory environment and avert legal liability for deaths or injuries in order to maximize profit. They work with attorneys and public relations professionals, using scientists, science advisory boards; front groups, industry organizations, think tanks, and the media to influence scientific and popular opinion of the risks of their products or processes. The strategy, which depends on corrupt science, profits corporations at the expense of public health. Public health professionals can learn from this strategy how to effectively build scientific and public opinion that prioritizes both good science and the public health.

Advisory Committees↗

NHS litigation.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Defensive Medicine↗