法医学的质量问题管理和信息披露:实践和观念的调查。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Anna L. Heavey MBA, Max M. Houck PhD, Gavin R. Turbett PhD, Simon W. Lewis PhD
{"title":"法医学的质量问题管理和信息披露:实践和观念的调查。","authors":"Anna L. Heavey MBA,&nbsp;Max M. Houck PhD,&nbsp;Gavin R. Turbett PhD,&nbsp;Simon W. Lewis PhD","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.70121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Addressing calls for transparency regarding errors and limitations in forensic processes is an ongoing concern for the forensic science service provider community and the stakeholders it serves worldwide. Foundational to this goal is developing a consistent approach to the identification of issues that have, or could have, an impact on the quality and reliability of forensic results. A standardized approach to the classification of quality issues detected within forensic agency management systems may be the strategic key to supporting consistent identification and disclosure, along with enhancing a positive quality culture throughout forensic service providers and building understanding of “error” in forensic science with end users of forensic information. A survey of international forensic science service providers was conducted to gain deeper insights into current systems of issue identification, classification, management, and disclosure along with perceptions on quality issues, their use and communication by forensic agency staff. The survey results demonstrate that development of a standardized approach would be of significant value to the forensic science community and its stakeholders, with potential benefit not only to improved communication and use of quality issue data but also in advancing a positive culture of quality and credibility in forensic service provision to support justice outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":15743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":"70 5","pages":"1866-1881"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.70121","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality issue management and disclosure in forensic science: A survey of practice and perceptions\",\"authors\":\"Anna L. Heavey MBA,&nbsp;Max M. Houck PhD,&nbsp;Gavin R. Turbett PhD,&nbsp;Simon W. Lewis PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1556-4029.70121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Addressing calls for transparency regarding errors and limitations in forensic processes is an ongoing concern for the forensic science service provider community and the stakeholders it serves worldwide. Foundational to this goal is developing a consistent approach to the identification of issues that have, or could have, an impact on the quality and reliability of forensic results. A standardized approach to the classification of quality issues detected within forensic agency management systems may be the strategic key to supporting consistent identification and disclosure, along with enhancing a positive quality culture throughout forensic service providers and building understanding of “error” in forensic science with end users of forensic information. A survey of international forensic science service providers was conducted to gain deeper insights into current systems of issue identification, classification, management, and disclosure along with perceptions on quality issues, their use and communication by forensic agency staff. The survey results demonstrate that development of a standardized approach would be of significant value to the forensic science community and its stakeholders, with potential benefit not only to improved communication and use of quality issue data but also in advancing a positive culture of quality and credibility in forensic service provision to support justice outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"volume\":\"70 5\",\"pages\":\"1866-1881\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1556-4029.70121\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.70121\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.70121","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

解决关于法医过程中错误和限制的透明度的呼吁是法医科学服务提供者社区及其在世界范围内所服务的利益攸关方持续关注的问题。实现这一目标的基础是制定一种一致的方法,以确定已经或可能对法医结果的质量和可靠性产生影响的问题。对法医机构管理系统中发现的质量问题进行标准化分类的方法可能是支持一致的鉴定和披露的战略关键,同时还可以在法医服务提供者中加强积极的质量文化,并与法医信息的最终用户建立对法医科学“错误”的理解。对国际法医科学服务提供商进行了一项调查,以更深入地了解当前的问题识别、分类、管理和披露系统,以及对质量问题的看法、它们的使用和法医机构工作人员的沟通。调查结果表明,标准化方法的发展对法医科学界及其利益相关者具有重要价值,不仅可以改善质量问题数据的沟通和使用,还可以促进法医服务提供质量和可信度的积极文化,以支持司法结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Quality issue management and disclosure in forensic science: A survey of practice and perceptions

Quality issue management and disclosure in forensic science: A survey of practice and perceptions

Addressing calls for transparency regarding errors and limitations in forensic processes is an ongoing concern for the forensic science service provider community and the stakeholders it serves worldwide. Foundational to this goal is developing a consistent approach to the identification of issues that have, or could have, an impact on the quality and reliability of forensic results. A standardized approach to the classification of quality issues detected within forensic agency management systems may be the strategic key to supporting consistent identification and disclosure, along with enhancing a positive quality culture throughout forensic service providers and building understanding of “error” in forensic science with end users of forensic information. A survey of international forensic science service providers was conducted to gain deeper insights into current systems of issue identification, classification, management, and disclosure along with perceptions on quality issues, their use and communication by forensic agency staff. The survey results demonstrate that development of a standardized approach would be of significant value to the forensic science community and its stakeholders, with potential benefit not only to improved communication and use of quality issue data but also in advancing a positive culture of quality and credibility in forensic service provision to support justice outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of forensic sciences
Journal of forensic sciences 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Forensic Sciences (JFS) is the official publication of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). It is devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries and reviews in various branches of the forensic sciences. These include anthropology, criminalistics, digital and multimedia sciences, engineering and applied sciences, pathology/biology, psychiatry and behavioral science, jurisprudence, odontology, questioned documents, and toxicology. Similar submissions dealing with forensic aspects of other sciences and the social sciences are also accepted, as are submissions dealing with scientifically sound emerging science disciplines. The content and/or views expressed in the JFS are not necessarily those of the AAFS, the JFS Editorial Board, the organizations with which authors are affiliated, or the publisher of JFS. All manuscript submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信