Figure 4.

a. Cross tabulation of non-orthodontist expert testimony and practicing years. A majority of participants reported that a non-orthodontist cannot provide expert testimony in a malpractice claim against an orthodontist throughout all practicing years. b. Cross tabulation of non-orthodontist expert testimony and age group. A majority of participants aged 38-58 reported that a non-orthodontist cannot provide expert testimony against an orthodontist. The age group 31-37 was evenly split. A majority of participants in the age group greater than 59 reported that a non-orthodontist can provide expert testimony. c. Percentage of orthodontists reporting on whether addressing common malpractice claims in board certification exams is beneficial. 46.8% of participants were unsure and reported “maybe”. d. Categorization of the causes of action in clinically related orthodontic litigation in percentage. The main cause of action in clinically related orthodontic litigation was negligence at 36% of the cases reviewed. (Other* - Misdiagnosis/mistreatment, Intentional infliction of emotional distress, Neglect, Wrongful death, Violation of personal liberty). e. Categorization of the causes of action in non-clinically related orthodontic litigation in percentage. 39% of the cases categorized under non-clinically related orthodontic litigation showed that practitioners were sued failing to obtain a proper informed consent from the patient. (Other* - Discrimination, Abandonment, Anticipatory repudiation, Tortious interference of contract, Unjust enrichment, Civil conspiracy).