Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
7
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1976-4-27
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
The application of different ways of thinking - that is to say the juridical, human scientific evaluating and the medical, natural scientific establishing - next to each other can direct to difficultics and divergencies in the reply of expert questions in medical liability proceedings, although each way of thinking attains to correct and practicable results. Relative to the medical expert this presums on the one hand a distinct degree of juridical mentality and necessitates on the other hand a medical mind and scrutiny of the factual situation coordinated to the juridical train of thoughts and terms. A particular importance is due herein to the knowledge of the principles and directions of the burden of proof within the rules of criminal and civil procedure. Starting from the legal handling the forms observing are explained in detail and illustrated by means of competent laws and court findings. Therewith an estimation of the medical state of affairs should be rendered possible for the medical expert adequate coordinated to the juridical terms.
|
| pubmed:language |
ger
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
Jul
|
| pubmed:issn |
0340-1588
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
54
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
538-41
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2006-11-15
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1975
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
[Principles of the burden of proof in medical liability proceedings (author's transl)].
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
English Abstract
|