context: A reliable differential diagnosis generally involves the performance of physical examinations, the taking of medical histories, and the review of clinical tests. While integrating scientific literature into the process might bolster the credibility of an expert's opinion, the absence of scholarly references in an expert report does not invariably exclude an otherwise rehable differential diagnosis.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 892 F.Supp. 756, 774
citation_a.parenthetical: "[I]f a person were doused with chemical X and immediately thereafter developed symptom Y, the need for published literature showing a correlation between the two may be lessened."
citation_a.sentence: See Cavallo v. Star Enter., 892 F.Supp. 756, 774 (E.D.Va.1995), aff'd in relevant part, 100 F.3d 1150, 1159 (4th Cir.1996) (“[I]f a person were doused with chemical X and immediately thereafter developed symptom Y, the need for published literature showing a correlation between the two may be lessened.”); see also Heller v. Shaw Indus. Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 154 (3d Cir.1999) (concluding that Daubert does not require a physician to “rely on definitive published studies before concluding that exposure to a particular object or chemical was the most likely cause of a plaintiffs illness”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 167 F.3d 146, 154
citation_b.parenthetical: concluding that Daubert does not require a physician to "rely on definitive published studies before concluding that exposure to a particular object or chemical was the most likely cause of a plaintiffs illness"
citation_b.sentence: See Cavallo v. Star Enter., 892 F.Supp. 756, 774 (E.D.Va.1995), aff'd in relevant part, 100 F.3d 1150, 1159 (4th Cir.1996) (“[I]f a person were doused with chemical X and immediately thereafter developed symptom Y, the need for published literature showing a correlation between the two may be lessened.”); see also Heller v. Shaw Indus. Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 154 (3d Cir.1999) (concluding that Daubert does not require a physician to “rely on definitive published studies before concluding that exposure to a particular object or chemical was the most likely cause of a plaintiffs illness”).