{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028374233128834355, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02147239263803681, 'mean_word_length': 4.625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Mistakes and omissions in judicial reports prepared in emergency services].

BACKGROUND
We aimed in this study to determine any mistakes or omissions made while preparing judicial reports, which contribute to the judicial process.


METHODS
In this study, we evaluated as samples 351 judicial reports of victims who applied to the Emergency Service of Ondokuz Mayis University between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2005 with respect to the judicial facts, and we recorded any mistakes or omissions of data in these reports.


RESULTS
We determined that there was no record of age in 6% of the judicial reports, of examination time in 71.8%, of traumatic lesion or not in 30.5%, of the state of consciousness in 58.7%, and of the presence or not of life-threatening risks in 2.6%. The name of the physician who prepared the report was not provided in 8.0% of the reports. The most important omission is that none of the reports had the name, surname or signature of the person who had taken the prepared report.


CONCLUSION
We concluded that, after graduation, it is necessary for physicians, who are responsible for both treating the patients and writing judicial reports, to attend in-service training programs. They must also be properly advised regarding their responsibilities in judicial cases.