Analytical and synthesizing part of the forensic expert panel conclusion: a case study of professional violation of healthcare professionals

Abstract

The objective of the study is to develop scientific criteria for the analytical and synthesizing part of the expert report on 'medical cases.' We studied 15 conclusions of expert panels. The following research methods were used: logical and analytical, logical and synthetic (generalization), comparative, systemic and analytical (analysis of relations between facts). For the first time, a new algorithm for the analytical and synthesizing part of the expert report was proposed; and also ways to improve the quality of forensic reports for all types of expert examinations, including those involving non-state forensic experts, were described. These improvements make the results of expert examinations and reviews more convenient and objective. They are intended for non-state forensic experts, attorneys who use them, and state forensic experts, including during the training and professional development.