Diagnosing child abuse

doi:10.1136/bmj.a1398

Published 2 October 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a1398
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1398

Editorials

Diagnosing child abuse

The evidence base is advancing through new areas of research

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

No field of medicine is more challenged and scrutinised by non-medicalprofessionals than paediatrics in the context of child abuse.The diagnosis of child abuse has social implications, it isthe subject of criminal and civil actions, and it threatensthe integrity of families. The diagnosis of child abuse is oftenmade on the basis of the presence of injuries and the absenceof a compatible history given by caregivers.

Law and science are based on different core assumptions of howtruth is established. The law frames questions in adversarialterms and uses argument, logic, and construction of a narrativeto prove the point. Science, in contrast, depends on observation,testing, and use of accumulated evidence from many sources.¹Scientific knowledge is established by aggregation and confirmationof studies, and the value of evidence depends on the methodologyof the study.

The systematic review of fractures in child abuse by . . . [Full text of this article]

Naomi F Sugar, clinical professor

¹ University of Washington, Department of Pediatrics, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington 98104, USA

nsugar@u.washington.edu

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Article

Patterns of skeletal fractures in child abuse: systematic review: Alison M Kemp, Frank Dunstan, Sara Harrison, Susan Morris, Mala Mann, Kim Rolfe, Shalini Datta, D Phillip Thomas, Jonathan R Sibert, and Sabine Maguire
BMJ 2008 337: a1518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]