{"title":"完善法医学循证实践:印度尼西亚法医学病理学版中法医流行病学整合的验证和对因果因素和循证报告原则的严格评估","authors":"Putri Dianita Ika Meilia, None Herkutanto, Agus Purwadianto, Budi Sampurna, Murdani Abdullah, Diantha Soemantri, Aria Kekalih","doi":"10.4103/jfsm.jfsm_47_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction Expert opinions presented in legal proceedings should be scientifically accountable, which is known as evidence-based practice (EBP). Although forensic medical expert opinions are essential in legal proceedings, the methods used to formulate them are not always evidence based or based on standard methods. In forensic medicine, EBP has not been explicitly applied, including in Indonesia. One potential approach to formulate evidence-based expert opinions is called INtegration of Forensic Epidemiology and the Rigorous EvaluatioN of Causation Elements (INFERENCE). In addition, there is also no universal guideline for making forensic pathological reports. One prospective guideline is named the Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version (PERFORM-P). Methods This article describes the validation process of INFERENCE and PERFORM-P in Indonesia. This study uses a mixed method through three interrelated phases, i.e., (1) a cross-sectional survey to determine the characteristics of Indonesian forensic doctors and their current practice, (2) the adaptation and validation process of the two tools through a review by the Indonesian College of Forensic Medicine, and (3) a one-group pre–postintervention study to assess the validity and reliability of forensic medical expert opinions formulated using Indonesian-INFERENCE (i-INFERENCE) and reported using Indonesian-PERFORM-P (i-PERFORM-P). Results and Discussion In general, both tools received a positive reception and can potentially be used in the Indonesian setting with some additions/clarifications in the user manuals. Participants envision that both tools will be most useful in complex cases. Conclusions By obtaining the i-INFERENCE and the i-PERFORM-P, it is hoped that Indonesian forensic medical doctors are better equipped in analyzing and reporting complex cases, and the implementation of EBP can be improved.","PeriodicalId":36434,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Science and Medicine","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving Evidence-Based Practice in Forensic Medicine: Validation of INtegration of Forensic Epidemiology and the Rigorous EvaluatioN of Causation Elements and Principles of Evidence-Based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version in Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Putri Dianita Ika Meilia, None Herkutanto, Agus Purwadianto, Budi Sampurna, Murdani Abdullah, Diantha Soemantri, Aria Kekalih\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jfsm.jfsm_47_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Introduction Expert opinions presented in legal proceedings should be scientifically accountable, which is known as evidence-based practice (EBP). Although forensic medical expert opinions are essential in legal proceedings, the methods used to formulate them are not always evidence based or based on standard methods. In forensic medicine, EBP has not been explicitly applied, including in Indonesia. One potential approach to formulate evidence-based expert opinions is called INtegration of Forensic Epidemiology and the Rigorous EvaluatioN of Causation Elements (INFERENCE). In addition, there is also no universal guideline for making forensic pathological reports. One prospective guideline is named the Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version (PERFORM-P). Methods This article describes the validation process of INFERENCE and PERFORM-P in Indonesia. This study uses a mixed method through three interrelated phases, i.e., (1) a cross-sectional survey to determine the characteristics of Indonesian forensic doctors and their current practice, (2) the adaptation and validation process of the two tools through a review by the Indonesian College of Forensic Medicine, and (3) a one-group pre–postintervention study to assess the validity and reliability of forensic medical expert opinions formulated using Indonesian-INFERENCE (i-INFERENCE) and reported using Indonesian-PERFORM-P (i-PERFORM-P). Results and Discussion In general, both tools received a positive reception and can potentially be used in the Indonesian setting with some additions/clarifications in the user manuals. Participants envision that both tools will be most useful in complex cases. Conclusions By obtaining the i-INFERENCE and the i-PERFORM-P, it is hoped that Indonesian forensic medical doctors are better equipped in analyzing and reporting complex cases, and the implementation of EBP can be improved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forensic Science and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forensic Science and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfsm.jfsm_47_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfsm.jfsm_47_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在法律诉讼中提出的专家意见应具有科学的可问责性,这被称为循证实践(EBP)。虽然法医专家意见在法律诉讼中是必不可少的,但用来提出这些意见的方法并不总是基于证据或基于标准方法。在法医学中,EBP尚未明确应用,包括在印度尼西亚。一种可能形成循证专家意见的方法被称为法医流行病学和因果因素(推理)的严格评估的整合。此外,法医病理报告也没有统一的准则。一项前瞻性指南被命名为《法医学病理学版循证报告原则》(PERFORM-P)。方法介绍了INFERENCE和performance - p在印度尼西亚的验证过程。本研究采用混合方法,通过三个相互关联的阶段,即:(1)横断面调查,以确定印度尼西亚法医的特点和他们目前的做法;(2)通过印度尼西亚法医学院的审查,两种工具的适应和验证过程;(3)一项单组干预前和干预后研究,评估采用印度尼西亚推理(i-INFERENCE)形成的法医专家意见的效度和可靠性,并使用印度尼西亚- perform - p (i-PERFORM-P)报告。结果和讨论总的来说,这两种工具都得到了积极的接受,并且可以在印度尼西亚环境中使用,在用户手册中进行一些补充/澄清。与会者设想,这两种工具在复杂情况下将是最有用的。结论通过i-INFERENCE和i-PERFORM-P,希望印尼法医能够更好地分析和报告复杂案件,提高EBP的实施水平。
Improving Evidence-Based Practice in Forensic Medicine: Validation of INtegration of Forensic Epidemiology and the Rigorous EvaluatioN of Causation Elements and Principles of Evidence-Based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version in Indonesia
Abstract Introduction Expert opinions presented in legal proceedings should be scientifically accountable, which is known as evidence-based practice (EBP). Although forensic medical expert opinions are essential in legal proceedings, the methods used to formulate them are not always evidence based or based on standard methods. In forensic medicine, EBP has not been explicitly applied, including in Indonesia. One potential approach to formulate evidence-based expert opinions is called INtegration of Forensic Epidemiology and the Rigorous EvaluatioN of Causation Elements (INFERENCE). In addition, there is also no universal guideline for making forensic pathological reports. One prospective guideline is named the Principles of Evidence-based Reporting in FORensic Medicine-Pathology version (PERFORM-P). Methods This article describes the validation process of INFERENCE and PERFORM-P in Indonesia. This study uses a mixed method through three interrelated phases, i.e., (1) a cross-sectional survey to determine the characteristics of Indonesian forensic doctors and their current practice, (2) the adaptation and validation process of the two tools through a review by the Indonesian College of Forensic Medicine, and (3) a one-group pre–postintervention study to assess the validity and reliability of forensic medical expert opinions formulated using Indonesian-INFERENCE (i-INFERENCE) and reported using Indonesian-PERFORM-P (i-PERFORM-P). Results and Discussion In general, both tools received a positive reception and can potentially be used in the Indonesian setting with some additions/clarifications in the user manuals. Participants envision that both tools will be most useful in complex cases. Conclusions By obtaining the i-INFERENCE and the i-PERFORM-P, it is hoped that Indonesian forensic medical doctors are better equipped in analyzing and reporting complex cases, and the implementation of EBP can be improved.