↓ Skip to main content

The Impact of Defense Expenses in Medical Malpractice Claims

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 738)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Impact of Defense Expenses in Medical Malpractice Claims
Published in
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
DOI 10.1111/j.1748-720x.2012.00651.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron E. Carroll, Parul Divya Parikh, Jennifer L. Buddenbaum

Abstract

The objective of this study was to take a closer look at defense-related expenses for medical malpractice cases over time. We conducted a retrospective review of medical malpractice claims reported to the Physician Insurers Association of America's Data Sharing Project with a closing date between January 1, 1985 and December 31, 2008. On average a medical malpractice claim costs more than $27,000 to defend. Claims that go to trial are much more costly to defend than are those that are dropped, withdrawn, or dismissed. However, since the overwhelming majority of claims are dropped, withdrawn, or dismissed, the total amount spent to defend them surpasses that spent on claims that go to trial. Defense attorney expenses account for the majority of defense-related expenses (74%), while expert witness expenses and other expenses split the remaining 26%. A strong association was also found between the average indemnity payment and the amount it costs to defend individual claims by specialty. Our study found that defense-related expenses for medical malpractice claims are not an insignificant cost. As state and federal governments debate how to repair the malpractice system, addressing the high cost of defending claims should not be ignored.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 4%
United Arab Emirates 1 4%
Unknown 22 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 21%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 46%
Social Sciences 4 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#428,697
of 12,550,366 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics
#22
of 738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,443
of 146,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,550,366 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 146,322 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.