SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turgut Özal Tıp Merkezi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3

Pathology and Malpractice

Patoloji ve Malpraktis

Bülent Mızrak
Osman Celbiş
Pages
213–217
Publication Date
2007-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Key words: Pathology, Malpractice, Law

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study malpractice in pathology was evaluated from a general perspective.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Some particular issues were discussed under the light of Turkish Penal Code and all legal procedure.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Key words: Pathology, Malpractice, Law
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Patoloji · Malpraktis · Hukuk

Abstract

In this study malpractice in pathology was evaluated from a general perspective. Some particular issues were discussed under the light of Turkish Penal Code and all legal procedure. Some suggestions were made to avoid the pathologist from judicial processes. Key words: Pathology, Malpractice, Law

Özet

Tıbbi uygulama hataları “tıbbi malpraktis” olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Bu çalışmada patoloji uygulamalarında malpraktis konusu genel çerçeve içinde ele alınmıştır. Hekimlerin karşılaşabilecekleri ceza ve tazminat davalarındaki hukuki ve tıbbi prosedürler tartışılmıştır. Patoloğun dikkat etmesi gereken hususlar genel hatlarıyla ele alınmıştır. Anahtar kelimeler: Patoloji, Malpraktis, Hukuk

🔖

Cite This Article

Mızrak, B., Celbiş, O. (2007). Pathology and Malpractice. Turgut Özal Tıp Merkezi Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 213–217. https://ajindex.com/articles/1434029

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Hancı İH. Malpraktis. Tıbbi girişimler nedeniyle hekimin ceza ve tazminat sorumluluğu. Ankara: Seçkin, 2002
  2. Hekimlik meslek etiği kuralları. http://www.ttb.org.tr/mevzuat/index.php?option= com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=31 (son ulaşım 27/2/2007)
  3. Hollensead SC, Lockwood WB, Elin RJ. Errors in pathology and laboratory medicine: consequences and prevention. J Surg Oncol 2004; 88:161-81
  4. Troxel DB. Medicolegal issues in surgical pathology. In: Weidner N, Cote R, Suster S, Weiss L, eds. Modern Surgical Pathology W.B. Saunders Co. London, New York:2003: 139-48
  5. Epstein JI. Pathologists and judicial process: how to avoid it. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25(4): 527-37
  6. Erol H. Yeni Türk Ceza Kanunu. Ankara: Yayın matbaacılık ve ticaret işletmesi, 2005.
  7. Berg KD, Murphy KM. Floaters in surgical pathology tissues. Genetic identity testing potential and pitfalls. Pathol Case Rev 2003;8(3): 103-10.
  8. Troxel DB. Diagnostic pitfalls in surgical pathology-Discovered by a review of malpractice claims. Part VII. Random errors. Int J Surg pathol 2001; 9(4):3058
  9. Troxel DB. Diagnostic errors in surgical pathology-Uncovered by a review of malpractice claims. Part I. General considerations. Int J Surg Pathol 2000;8(2):161-3.
  10. Varner CD. Liability issues with the Papanicolau smear. A defense lawyer’s perspective. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;121(3):315-20.
  11. Epstein JI, Kidwell R. Who is the owner of slides, blocks and fixed tissues?: author’s reply. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26(2):274.
  12. Özçelik Z, Biçer Ü. Türk Ceza Kanunu. Hekimler ve sağlık ortamına ilişkin maddeleri. Yorum, öneri ve eleştiriler. Ankara: Türk tabipler birliği yayınları, 2005