Expert opinion on screening, diagnosis and management of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a multidisciplinary approach.

The proposed expert opinion aimed to address the current knowledge on conceptual, clinical, and therapeutic aspects of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and to provide a guidance document to assist clinicians for the best practice in DPN care. The participating experts consider the suspicion of the disease by clinicians as a key factor in early recognition and diagnosis, emphasizing an improved awareness of the disease by the first-admission or referring physicians. The proposed "screening and diagnostic" algorithm involves the consideration of DPN in a patient with prediabetes or diabetes who presents with neuropathic symptoms and/or signs of neuropathy in the presence of DPN risk factors, with careful consideration of laboratory testing to rule out other causes of distal symmetric peripheral neuropathy and referral for a detailed neurological work-up for a confirmative test of either small or large nerve fiber dysfunction in atypical cases. Although, the first-line interventions for DPN are currently represented by optimized glycemic control (mainly for type 1 diabetes) and multifactorial intervention (mainly for type 2 diabetes), there is a need for individualized pathogenesis-directed treatment approaches for DPN. Alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) seems to be an important first-line pathogenesis-directed agent, given that it is a direct and indirect antioxidant that works with a strategy targeted directly against reactive oxygen species and indirectly in favor of endogenous antioxidant capacity for improving DPN conditions. There is still a gap in existing research in the field, necessitating well-designed, robust, multicenter clinical trials with sensitive endpoints and standardized protocols to facilitate the diagnosis of DPN via a simple and effective algorithm and to track progression of disease and treatment response. Identification of biomarkers/predictors that would allow an individualized approach from a potentially disease-modifying perspective may provide opportunities for novel treatments that would be efficacious in early stages of DPN, and may modify the natural course of the disease. This expert opinion document is expected to increase awareness among physicians about conceptual, clinical, and therapeutic aspects of DPN and to assist them in timely recognition of DPN and translating this information into their clinical practice for best practice in the management of patients with DPN.

The effect of confession evidence on jurors' verdict decisions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past 4 decades, discrepant research findings have emerged in the juror-confession literature, prompting the need for a systematic review and meta-analysis that assesses the effect of confession evidence (coerced or noncoerced) on conviction rates and the efficacy of trial safeguards. HYPOTHESES: We did not predict any directional hypotheses. Some studies show increased convictions when a confession is present (vs. not), regardless of whether that confession was coerced; other studies demonstrate that jurors are able to discount coerced confessions. Studies have also demonstrated sensitivity effects (safeguards aided jurors in making appropriate decisions), skepticism effects (safeguards led jurors to indiscriminately disregard confession evidence), or null effects with regard to expert testimony and jury instructions. METHOD: We identified 83 independent samples (N = 24,860) that met our meta-analytic inclusion criteria. Using extracted Hedges' g effect sizes, we conducted both network meta-analysis and metaregression to address key research questions. RESULTS: Coerced and noncoerced confessions (vs. no confession) increased convictions (network gs = 0.34 and 0.70, respectively), yet coerced (vs. noncoerced) confessions reduced convictions (network g = -0.36). When jury instructions were employed (vs. not), convictions in coerced confession cases were reduced (this difference did not emerge for noncoerced confessions; a sensitivity effect). Expert testimony, however, reduced conviction likelihood regardless of whether a confession was coerced (a skepticism effect). CONCLUSION: Confession evidence is persuasive, and although jurors appear to recognize the detrimental effect of coercive interrogation methods on confession reliability, they do not fully discount unreliable confessions. Educational safeguards are therefore needed, but more research is encouraged to identify the most effective forms of jury instructions and expert testimony. One potential reform could be in the interrogation room itself, as science-based interviewing approaches could provide jurors with more reliable defendant statement evidence that assists them in reaching appropriate verdict decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Adult Pneumococcal Vaccination in Ghana: Current Status and Future Recommendations - Expert Opinion.

Vaccination programs have proven successful in the prevention and control of infectious diseases among children on a global scale, but the majority of adult populations remain unvaccinated. immunocompromised adults as well as older adults aged low-income countries as Streptococcus pneumoniae infections are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality among 65 years and above. Despite the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs), the burden of vaccine-type serotypes remains high in there are no clear policies for adult vaccination. As per the Global Burden of Disease 2019 report, about 120,000 individuals aged 70 years and older died as a result of LRTIs) in sub-Saharan Africa. A medical advisory board meeting was conducted in April 2022 to discuss the burden of pneumococcal diseases in adults, the current status of policies and practices of adult vaccination, unmet needs, and challenges in Ghana. This expert opinion paper outlines the pneumococcal epidemiology and burden of disease in Ghana, as well as the rationale for adult pneumococcal vaccination. It also highlights the potential barriers to adult vaccination and offers recommendations to overcome these obstacles and enhance vaccine acceptance in Ghana.

Les programmes de vaccination ont prouvé leur succès dans la prévention et le contrôle des maladies infectieuses chez les enfants à l'échelle mondiale, mais la majorité des populations adultes restent non vaccinées. Les infections à Streptococcus pneumoniae sont associées à une morbidité et une mortalité substantielles chez les adultes immunodéprimés ainsi que chez les personnes âgées de 65 ans et plus. Malgré l'introduction des vaccins conjugués contre le pneumocoque (VCP), la charge des sérotypes vaccinaux reste élevée dans les pays à faible revenu car il n'existe pas de politiques claires en matière de vaccination des adultes. Selon le rapport sur la charge mondiale de morbidité de 2019, environ 120 000 personnes âgées de 70 ans et plus sont décédées des suites d'infections des voies respiratoires inférieures (IVRI) en Afrique subsaharienne. Une réunion du conseil consultatif médical a eu lieu en avril 2022 pour discuter du fardeau des maladies pneumococciques chez les adultes, de l'état actuel des politiques et pratiques de vaccination des adultes, des besoins non satisfaits et des défis au Ghana. Cet article d'opinion d'experts présente l'épidémiologie pneumococcique et le fardeau de la maladie au Ghana, ainsi que les arguments en faveur de la vaccination pneumococcique des adultes. Il met également en lumière les obstacles potentiels à la vaccination des adultes et propose des recommandations pour surmonter ces obstacles et améliorer l'acceptation des vaccins au Ghana. MOTS-CLÉS: Maladie pneumococcique, Fardeau de la maladie, Vaccin conjugué contre le pneumocoque, Vaccination des adultes, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Ghana, Défis de la vaccination, Immunisation des adultes, VCP-13, Pneumonie acquise en communauté.

Forensic Neurology: Practice Considerations and Training Opportunities.

Neurologic evidence, including MRI, PET, and EEG, has been introduced in more than 2,800 criminal cases in the past decade, including 12% of all murder trials and 25% of death penalty trials, to argue whether neurologic diseases are present, contribute to criminal behavior, and ultimately whether the defendant is less criminally responsible, competent to stand trial, or should receive a reduced punishment for his or her crime. Unfortunately, neurologists are often not involved in these criminal cases despite being the medical specialty with the most relevant training and expertise to address these issues for the court. Reasons for the absence of neurologists in criminal cases include a lack of awareness from lawyers, judges, and other expert witnesses on the value of including neurologists in forensic evaluations, and the lack of experience, training, and willingness of neurologists to work as expert witnesses in criminal cases. Here, we discuss forensic neurology, a field bridging the gap between neurology, neuroscience, and the law. We discuss the process of performing forensic evaluations, including answering 3 fundamental questions: the neurologic diagnostic question, the behavioral neurology/neuropsychiatry question, and the forensic neurology question. We discuss practical aspects of performing forensic expert witness work and important ethical differences between the neurologist's role in treatment vs forensic settings. Finally, we discuss the currently available pathways for interested neurologists to receive additional training in forensic assessments.

The role of echocardiography in sports cardiology: An expert opinion statement of the Italian Society of Sports Cardiology (SIC sport).

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is routinely required during pre-participation screening in the presence of symptoms, family history of sudden cardiac death or cardiomyopathies <40-year-old, murmurs, abnormal ECG findings or in the follow-up of athletes with a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). TTE is a cost-effective first-line imaging modality to evaluate the cardiac remodeling due to long-term, intense training, previously known as the athlete's heart, and to rule out the presence of conditions at risk of sudden cardiac death, including cardiomyopathies, coronary artery anomalies, congenital, aortic and heart valve diseases. Moreover, TTE is useful for distinguishing physiological cardiac adaptations during intense exercise from pathological behavior due to an underlying CVD. In this expert opinion statement endorsed by the Italian Society of Sports Cardiology, we discussed common clinical scenarios where a TTE is required and conditions falling in the grey zone between the athlete's heart and underlying cardiomyopathies or other CVD. In addition, we propose a minimum dataset that should be included in the report for the most common indications of TTE in sports cardiology clinical practice.

Expert opinion on the management of patients with osteoporosis with anabolic drugs in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: Fragility fractures (FF) resulting from osteoporosis pose a significant public health challenge in Italy, with considerable socio-health and economic implications. Despite the availability of safe and effective drugs, osteoporosis remains underdiagnosed and undertreated, leaving over 2 million high-risk Italian women without treatment. This paper aims to identify and propose key improvements in the management of osteoporosis, focusing particularly on the critical issues related to the use of anabolic drugs in secondary prevention, according to the current Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) Note 79. METHODS: The Expert Panel, composed of nine recognized Italian experts in rheumatology, analyzed current practices, prescribing criteria, and the most recent literature. Three main reasons for revising the indications on pharmacological treatment of osteoporosis were identified: inadequate treatment of osteoporosis, new evidence regarding frontline placement of anabolics in high-risk conditions, and emerging sequential or combined strategies. RESULTS: The proposed improvements include the adoption of the Derived Fracture Risk Assessment algorithm for accurate fracture risk assessment, revision of AIFA Note 79 to reflect current evidence, improved prescribing appropriateness, broader access to anabolic agents, and the provision of sequential therapies with antiresorptives for teriparatide. These changes aim to enhance patient outcomes, streamline healthcare processes, and address the high percentage of undertreated individuals. CONCLUSIONS: This expert opinion emphasizes the importance of the appropriate use of anabolic drugs to reduce FF and associated costs while ensuring the sustainability of the National Health Service. The proposed recommendations are in line with the latest scientific evidence, providing a comprehensive strategy to optimize the management of osteoporosis in Italy. On behalf of the Study Group on Osteoporosis and Skeletal Metabolic Diseases of the Italian Society of Rheumatology.

[Legal and forensic medical problems of postmortem donation]. / Pravovye i sudebno-meditsinskie problemy posmertnogo donorstva.

The article is devoted to legal and forensic medical problems of postmortem donation. The substantive provisions of postmortem donation, as well as normative legal documents regulating the processes of organs harvesting from deceased persons for subsequent transplantation and governing the work of transplantologists and forensic medical experts have been considered. The practical examples illustrating the essence and nature of the problem of postmortem forensic medical expertise of persons with absent organs has been given and the importance of the participation of a forensic medical expert involved in the decision-making process on possibility (or impossibility) of the corpse's organs and tissues explantation without prejudice to the further expert examination has been emphasized. The authors pay particular attention to the inadequacy of the legal framework, including the lack of a clear understanding of the legal status of the person holding the position of forensic medical expert, who provides an expert opinion on the organs' explantation.

[Diagnostic criteria of death cause from low temperature in air and water established by traditional expert examination methods]. / Diagnosticheskie kriterii prichiny smerti ot deistviya nizkoi temperatury na vozdukhe i v vode, ustanavlivaemye s pomoshch'yu traditsionnykh metodov ekspertnogo issledovaniya.

Death from general hypothermia is one of the leading causes in the structure of violent death in the Russian Federation. OBJECTIVE: To clarify and supplement the complex of differential diagnostic macro- and microscopic signs of a fatal acute general cold trauma received when person is in the air and water. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The conclusions of forensic medical experts on the bodies of people who died from hypothermia in the air and in water (by 150 observations) were analyzed. Methods of descriptive statistics, calculation of the frequency ratio of signs' occurrence were used. RESULTS: The article provides quantitative assessment of occurrence (detection) rate of diagnostically significant signs established with the help of traditional methods of expert examination. A new classification of diagnostic death signs from hypothermia taking into account their differential diagnostic significance and reflecting the conditions of a person's stay in the air and water in the pre-mortem and post-mortem periods, as well as terminal period mechanisms is proposed. CONCLUSION: The established complexes of signs provide an objective basis for determining death cause in non-obvious conditions when cold exposure is expected to be one of the most damaging factors.

[Laboratory examinations in forensic medical expertises on crimes against sexual integrity and sexual freedom]. / Laboratornye issledovaniya v sudebno-meditsinskikh ekspertizakh po prestupleniyam protiv polovoi neprikosnovennosti i polovoi svobody lichnosti.

The article presents the results of analysis of 482 forensic biological and forensic cytological expertises on cases of sexual crimes. A presence of different types of such crimes has been noted. Expertises' effectiveness when examining content of vagina, oral cavity and rectum, impression smears and lavages from suspects' genital organs, subungual content of victims and suspects and other objects has been determined. The dependence of expertises' effectiveness on the terms of object removal has been noted. The article presents a number of objects' examination methods (luminescent-microscopic spermatozoids' identification, diagnosis of cells origin from mucous membranes of the vagina and oral cavity, determination of group belonging of specific cells in specimens, diagnosis of fecal masses presence) allowing to improve expertises' quality.

Forensic Neurology and the Role of Neurologists in Forensic Evaluations.

Forensic psychiatrists may be asked to opine on neurological evidence or neurological diseases outside the scope of their expertise. This article discusses the value of involving experts trained in behavioral neurology in such cases. First, we describe the field of behavioral neurology and neuropsychiatry, the subspecialty available to both neurologists and psychiatrists focused on the behavioral, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric manifestations of neurological diseases. Next, we discuss the added value of behavioral neurologists in forensic cases, including assisting in the diagnostic evaluation for complex neuropsychiatric diseases, using expertise in localization to provide a strong scientific basis for linking neurodiagnostic testing to relevant neuropsychiatric symptoms, and assisting in relating these symptoms to the relevant legal question in cases where such symptoms may be less familiar to forensic psychiatrists, such as frontal lobe syndromes. We discuss approaches to integrating behavioral neurology with forensic psychiatry, highlighting the need for collaboration and mentorship between disciplines. Finally, we discuss several forensic cases highlighting the additional value of experts trained in behavioral neurology. We conclude that forensic psychiatrists should involve behavioral neurology experts when encountering neurological evidence that falls outside their scope of expertise, and the need for further cross-disciplinary collaboration and training.

Forensic Neurology and the Role of Neurologists in Forensic Evaluations.

There is a clear need for experts with the requisite knowledge and experience to offer medicolegal opinions pertaining to various neuropsychiatric conditions. There is also an important distinction between clinical and medicolegal roles, and the need for training and expertise applicable to forensic assessment. But there remain few available experts with credentials spanning neuropsychiatry and forensic assessment. This creates a dilemma whereby parties involved in litigation featuring neuropsychiatric illness or injury are frequently forced to choose between experts with either knowledge and skills applicable to neuropsychiatric conditions or experts with skills and experience applicable to forensic assessment. Either choice introduces risk. Whether flawed medicolegal opinions are a consequence of deficient medical knowledge or an inadequate forensic evaluation process, the result remains the same, with triers of fact potentially being exposed to problematic testimony. There is, however, a more fundamental problem that implicates patient care more broadly: spurious dichotomies created by the historical segregation of psychiatry and neurology. Optimizing clinical care for patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, improving medical education in support of such care, and enabling forensic neuropsychiatric assessment must then start with more proactive efforts to reintegrate psychiatry and neurology.

Utilization of expert opinion in infectious diseases clinical guidelines-A meta-epidemiological study.

INTRODUCTION: Expert opinion is widely used in clinical guidelines. No research has ever been conducted investigating the use of expert opinion in international infectious disease guidelines. This study aimed to create an analytical map by describing the prevalence and utilization of expert opinion in infectious disease guidelines and analyzing the methodological aspects of these guidelines. METHODS: In this meta-epidemiological study, systematic searches in PubMed and Trip Medical Database were performed to identify clinical guidelines on infectious diseases, published between January 2018 and May 2023 in English, by international organizations. Data extracted included guideline characteristics, expert opinion utilization, and methodological details. Prevalence and rationale of expert opinion use were analyzed descriptively. Methodological differences between groups were analyzed with Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U Test. RESULTS: The analysis covered 66 guidelines with 2296 recommendations, published/endorsed by 136 organizations. Most guidelines (79%) used systematic literature searches, 42% provided search strategies, and 38% presented screening flow diagrams and conducted risk of bias assessments. 48.5% of the guidelines allowed expert opinion, most of which included expert opinion as part of the evidence hierarchy within the grading system. Guidelines allowing expert opinion, compared to those which do not, issued more recommendations per guideline (48.82 vs.19.13, p<0.001), and reported fewer screening flow diagrams (25% vs. 65%, p = 0.002), and less risk of bias assessments (19% vs.78%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Expert opinion is utilized in half of assessed guidelines, often integrated into the evidence hierarchy within the grading system. Its utilization varies considerably in methodology, form, and terminology between guidelines. These findings highlight a pressing need for additional research and guidance, to improve and advance the standardization of infectious disease guidelines.

Structured expert judgement approach of the health impact of various chemicals and classes of chemicals.

INTRODUCTION: Chemical contamination and pollution are an ongoing threat to human health and the environment. The concern over the consequences of chemical exposures at the global level continues to grow. Because resources are constrained, there is a need to prioritize interventions focused on the greatest health impact. Data, especially related to chemical exposures, are rarely available for most substances of concern, and alternate methods to evaluate their impact are needed. STRUCTURED EXPERT JUDGMENT (SEJ) PROCESS: A Structured Expert Judgment (Research Outreach, 2021) process was performed to provide plausible estimates of health impacts for 16 commonly found pollutants: asbestos, arsenic, benzene, chromium, cadmium, dioxins, fluoride, highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs), lead, mercury, polycyclic-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances (PFAs), phthalates, endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), and brominated flame retardants (BRFs). This process, undertaken by sector experts, weighed individual estimations of the probable global health scale health impacts of each pollutant using objective estimates of the expert opinions' statistical accuracy and informativeness. MAIN FINDINGS: The foremost substances, in terms of mean projected annual total deaths, were lead, asbestos, arsenic, and HHPs. Lead surpasses the others by a large margin, with an estimated median value of 1.7 million deaths annually. The three other substances averaged between 136,000 and 274,000 deaths per year. Of the 12 other chemicals evaluated, none reached an estimated annual death count exceeding 100,000. These findings underscore the importance of prioritizing available resources on reducing and remediating the impacts of these key pollutants. RANGE OF HEALTH IMPACTS: Based on the evidence available, experts concluded some of the more notorious chemical pollutants, such as PCBs and dioxin, do not result in high levels of human health impact from a global scale perspective. However, the chemical toxicity of some compounds released in recent decades, such as Endocrine Disrupters and PFAs, cannot be ignored, even if current impacts are limited. Moreover, the impact of some chemicals may be disproportionately large in some geographic areas. Continued research and monitoring are essential; and a preventative approach is needed for chemicals. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: These results, and potential similar analyses of other chemicals, are provided as inputs to ongoing discussions about priority setting for global chemicals and pollution management. Furthermore, we suggest that this SEJ process be repeated periodically as new information becomes available.

Evaluating ChatGPT to test its robustness as an interactive information database of radiation oncology and to assess its responses to common queries from radiotherapy patients: A single institution investigation.

PURPOSE: Commercial vendors have created artificial intelligence (AI) tools for use in all aspects of life and medicine, including radiation oncology. AI innovations will likely disrupt workflows in the field of radiation oncology. However, limited data exist on using AI-based chatbots about the quality of radiation oncology information. This study aims to assess the accuracy of ChatGPT, an AI-based chatbot, in answering patients' questions during their first visit to the radiation oncology outpatient department and test knowledge of ChatGPT in radiation oncology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Expert opinion was formulated using a set of ten standard questions of patients encountered in outpatient department practice. A blinded expert opinion was taken for the ten questions on common queries of patients in outpatient department visits, and the same questions were evaluated on ChatGPT version 3.5 (ChatGPT 3.5). The answers by expert and ChatGPT were independently evaluated for accuracy by three scientific reviewers. Additionally, a comparison was made for the extent of similarity of answers between ChatGPT and experts by a response scoring for each answer. Word count and Flesch-Kincaid readability score and grade were done for the responses obtained from expert and ChatGPT. A comparison of the answers of ChatGPT and expert was done with a Likert scale. As a second component of the study, we tested the technical knowledge of ChatGPT. Ten multiple choice questions were framed with increasing order of difficulty - basic, intermediate and advanced, and the responses were evaluated on ChatGPT. Statistical testing was done using SPSS version 27. RESULTS: After expert review, the accuracy of expert opinion was 100%, and ChatGPT's was 80% (8/10) for regular questions encountered in outpatient department visits. A noticeable difference was observed in word count and readability of answers from expert opinion or ChatGPT. Of the ten multiple-choice questions for assessment of radiation oncology database, ChatGPT had an accuracy rate of 90% (9 out of 10). One answer to a basic-level question was incorrect, whereas all answers to intermediate and difficult-level questions were correct. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT provides reasonably accurate information about routine questions encountered in the first outpatient department visit of the patient and also demonstrated a sound knowledge of the subject. The result of our study can inform the future development of educational tools in radiation oncology and may have implications in other medical fields. This is the first study that provides essential insight into the potentially positive capabilities of two components of ChatGPT: firstly, ChatGPT's response to common queries of patients at OPD visits, and secondly, the assessment of the radiation oncology knowledge base of ChatGPT.

[Medical negligence in cardiology: enter the lawyers and the experts and, then, the judge]. / Colpa medica in cardiologia: entrano gli avvocati e gli esperti e, poi, il giudice.

Legal proceedings for medical negligence usually origin from painful events and their management is often complex, also at an emotional level, both for the families involved and for the physicians assumed to carry responsibility. Many of these aspects are unfamiliar and unclear to the doctors themselves who then need to interact, together with their lawyers, with judges who must take serious decisions on technical facts not easy to be fully comprehended by non-medical persons.On the basis of our different and highly specific personal experience, we have tried to clarify some of the fundamental issues concerning medico-legal cases. Accordingly, we have discussed the different types of guilt, made the distinction between civil and penal cases, with special focus on one issue which is particularly critical, namely that of the importance of guidelines. We have presented some examples of clinical cases and highlighted some glaring differences existing in the management of medico-legal cases between Italy and the United States. Despite obvious complexities, these differences might suggest some approaches toward the simplification of these proceedings and the shortening of the time involved to reach a conclusion.

Speaker identification in courtroom contexts - Part III: Groups of collaborating listeners compared to forensic voice comparison based on automatic-speaker-recognition technology.

Expert testimony is only admissible in common-law systems if it will potentially assist the trier of fact. In order for a forensic-voice-comparison expert's testimony to assist a trier of fact, the expert's forensic voice comparison should be more accurate than the trier of fact's speaker identification. "Speaker identification in courtroom contexts - Part I" addressed the question of whether speaker identification by an individual lay listener (such as a judge) would be more or less accurate than the output of a forensic-voice-comparison system that is based on state-of-the-art automatic-speaker-recognition technology. The present paper addresses the question of whether speaker identification by a group of collaborating lay listeners (such as a jury) would be more or less accurate than the output of such a forensic-voice-comparison system. As members of collaborating groups, participants listen to pairs of recordings reflecting the conditions of the questioned- and known-speaker recordings in an actual case, confer, and make a probabilistic consensus judgement on each pair of recordings. The present paper also compares group-consensus responses with "wisdom of the crowd" which uses the average of the responses from multiple independent individual listeners.

Bite marks: To opine or not to opine?

Much has been written about bite mark comparisons and bite mark analysis. It has largely been written for, and remained within the domain of, the forensic odontologist despite the limited number of such specialists and the even smaller subset who have expertise in this area. For those health professionals who work in the field of clinical forensic medicine, most will not have access to a forensic odontologist. Courts can be reticent about the costs involved in obtaining another expert opinion. For health professionals, who will likely encounter more bite marks in their career than forensic odontologists, the difficulty is knowing what can legitimately be opined about such injuries.