Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The discussion in Images in Clinical Medicine by Hylton and Goldberg (July 8 issue) 1 implies that the circumpapillary retinal ridge is pathognomonic for the shaken-baby syndrome. This belief was widely held among ophthalmologists, pediatricians, and forensic pathologists until it was recently challenged. 2,3 Two studies used a process associated with evidence-based medicine to evaluate the premise that the perimacular retinal fold is diagnostic of shaken-baby syndrome. Both studies found that such a presupposition was not supported by solid scientific evidence. Since a diagnosis of shaken-baby syndrome can lead to serious conse-quences, doctors should be cautious when using the circumpapillary retinal ridge as the sole criterion for this diagnosis.
Tricia Thompson (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: