The veteran had 2 opinions from the same VA examiner that were conflicting,(figure that?) and a third VA opinion that supported the claim. Still this claim ended up at the board-even though the RO could have made a proper decision.
The BVA referenced 3 CAVC decisions thus:
"An evaluation of the probative value of medical opinion
evidence is based on the medical expert's personal
examination of the patient, the examiner's knowledge and
skill in analyzing the data, and the medical conclusion
reached. The credibility and weight to be attached to such
opinions are within the province of the Board as
adjudicators. Guerrieri v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 467, 470-71
(1993)."
"Greater weight may be placed on one physician's opinion over
another depending on factors such as reasoning employed by
the physicians and whether or not and the extent to which
they reviewed prior clinical records and other evidence.
Gabrielson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 36, 40 (1994)."
" The
probative value of a medical opinion is generally based on
the scope of the examination or review, as well as the
relative merits of the expert's qualifications and analytical
findings, and the probative weight of a medical opinion may
be reduced if the examiner fails to explain the basis for an
opinion. See Sklar v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 140 (1993). "
This all shows what a good IMO should contain too-
Personal examination if possible,
medical knowledge and skill to render the opinion,
conclusion,
full review of medical records and other evidence,
qualifications of the physician and
the basis (rationale) for the opinion.
Although this claim was remanded for two disabilities, the disability the veteran claimed that these statements were used for -was granted.
If you pay an IMO doctor real cash money- and they are not familiar with the VA criteria-
you have every right to present to them a format that the VA will accept.
This case above was not a question of a nexus factor but an IMO should use the nexus factor even if it is obvious. Somewhere at hadit is the more than likely, as likely as not etc stuff that the VA also wants to see stated in a medical opinion.
Dr. Bash referenced the actual IOM report on Agent Orange in my IMO although the VA had already conceded exposure. The nexus factor was not in question but he made sure he stated it anyhow.
Question
Berta
This might help someone out there-
from:http://www.va.gov/vetapp06/files4/0620890.txt
The veteran had 2 opinions from the same VA examiner that were conflicting,(figure that?) and a third VA opinion that supported the claim. Still this claim ended up at the board-even though the RO could have made a proper decision.
The BVA referenced 3 CAVC decisions thus:
"An evaluation of the probative value of medical opinion
evidence is based on the medical expert's personal
examination of the patient, the examiner's knowledge and
skill in analyzing the data, and the medical conclusion
reached. The credibility and weight to be attached to such
opinions are within the province of the Board as
adjudicators. Guerrieri v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 467, 470-71
(1993)."
"Greater weight may be placed on one physician's opinion over
another depending on factors such as reasoning employed by
the physicians and whether or not and the extent to which
they reviewed prior clinical records and other evidence.
Gabrielson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 36, 40 (1994)."
" The
probative value of a medical opinion is generally based on
the scope of the examination or review, as well as the
relative merits of the expert's qualifications and analytical
findings, and the probative weight of a medical opinion may
be reduced if the examiner fails to explain the basis for an
opinion. See Sklar v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 140 (1993). "
This all shows what a good IMO should contain too-
Personal examination if possible,
medical knowledge and skill to render the opinion,
conclusion,
full review of medical records and other evidence,
qualifications of the physician and
the basis (rationale) for the opinion.
Although this claim was remanded for two disabilities, the disability the veteran claimed that these statements were used for -was granted.
If you pay an IMO doctor real cash money- and they are not familiar with the VA criteria-
you have every right to present to them a format that the VA will accept.
This case above was not a question of a nexus factor but an IMO should use the nexus factor even if it is obvious. Somewhere at hadit is the more than likely, as likely as not etc stuff that the VA also wants to see stated in a medical opinion.
Dr. Bash referenced the actual IOM report on Agent Orange in my IMO although the VA had already conceded exposure. The nexus factor was not in question but he made sure he stated it anyhow.
Edited by BertaLink to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
1
Popular Days
Nov 30
1
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 1 post
Popular Days
Nov 30 2006
1 post
0 answers to this question
Recommended Posts