Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Three Studies on Malpractice Insurance Rates

Yesterday's column by Dan Margolies, legal affairs reporter for the Kansas City Star, provides links, in one handy location, to three studies that are being widely cited in the current debate on medical malpractice insurance rates:


Ted writes ...

Problems with the Texas study may or may not explain why it contradicts the other two.

6:31 PM  
pn writes ...

Of course, as Margolies notes, a legitimate part of the debate is how far they really contradict each other.

6:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.