Misconduct Relating To Radiologists And Ultrasound Technologists

Scientific misconduct is an act which intentionally compromises the honesty of scientific research, such as plagiarism or the falsification or untruth of data.

Scientific misconduct may also be defined as the violation of the typical codes of scholarly ways and ethical behavior in professional scientific study.

Scientific misconduct is currently widely documented as a genuine and significant problem for contemporary science, but too often the participants in the research system and those external who are affected by it-suffer from require of clarity about what constitutes scientific misconduct.

This is the case relating to radiology (ultrasound technologist) in which plaintiff brings a medical misconduct claim against a radiologist and ultrasound technologist for the failure to detect neural tube defects of the fetus at 22 week gestation. The plaintiff also claimed on behalf of her infant

It was clear from the evidence that the examination actually performed was a level 1 examination and at this time the AIUM and ACR Guidelines did not require all of the limbs to be examined when performing this type of ultrasound.

The plaintiff also argued that the hard copy films of the ultrasound were inadequate and failed to provide sufficient information to the physician for him to make a proper diagnosis. The court dismissed this claim stating that not only was there expert evidence suggesting that the harm copy films were of average quality, but also the physician was entitled to rely upon the report prepared by the ultrasound technologist regarding her observation of the real time examination.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the action and holding the ultrasound technologist had exercised the reasonable degree of learning and skill that was required to