Question

英语高手帮帮忙！！帮我翻译一下外文，急急！！！

We analyzed the prevalence, characteristics, litigation outcomes, and costs of claims that lacked evidence of error.
Results For 3 percent of the claims, there were no verifiable medical injuries, and 37 percent did not involve errors. Most of the claims that were not associated with errors (370 of 515 ) or injuries (31 of 37 ) did not result in compensation; most that involved injuries due to error did (653 of 889 ). Payment of claims not involving errors occurred less frequently than did the converse form of inaccuracy ― nonpayment of claims associated with errors. When claims not involving errors were compensated, payments were significantly lower on average than were payments for claims involving errors ($313,205 vs. $521,560, P=0.004). Overall, claims not involving errors accounted for 13 to 16 percent of the system's total monetary costs. For every dollar spent on compensation, 54 cents went to administrative expenses (including those involving lawyers, experts, and courts). Claims involving errors accounted for 78 percent of total administrative costs.
Conclusions Claims that lack evidence of error are not uncommon, but most are denied compensation. The vast majority of expenditures go toward litigation over errors and payment of them. The overhead costs of malpractice litigation are exorbitant.
The debate over medical malpractice litigation continues unabated in the United States1 and other countries.2,3,4 Advocates of tort reform, including members of the Bush administration, lament the burden of "frivolous" malpractice lawsuits and cite them as a driving force behind rising health care costs.5,6 (A frivolous claim is one that "present no rational argument based upon the evidence or law in support of the claim."7) Plaintiffs' attorneys refute this charge, countering that contingency fees and the prevalence of medical errors make the pursuit of meritless lawsuits bad business and unnecessary.8,9
Previous research has established that the great majority of patients who sustain a medical injury as a result of negligence do not sue.10,11 However, the merit of claims that are brought, and the ability of the malpractice system to resolve them appropriately, remain much more controversial.1,12,13,14 If frivolous claims are common and costly, they may be a substantial source of waste in the health care and legal systems.

提示该问答中所提及的号码未经验证，请注意甄别。

Answer 1

我们分析了（医疗人为失误的）流行程度，特征，诉讼结果和证据（人为失误的证据）不足的索赔成本。
3%的索赔结果是，没有可作为证据的医源性损伤。37%的索赔结果是未涉及人为失误。大多数无关于人为失误（370 of 515）和医源性损伤(31 of 37 )的索赔最终并未得到赔偿。大多数因人为失误涉及医源性损伤的索赔最终得到了赔偿 (653 of 889 ).涉及人为失误的索赔，支付索赔金的案例往往少于不支付索赔金的案例。即使当不涉及人为失误的索赔最终被赔偿时，赔偿金往往远远低于涉及人为失误的索赔赔偿金 ($313,205 vs. $521,560, P=0.004)。通观可见，不涉及人为失误的索赔占据了总体成本的13%-16%。 花在赔偿金上的每一美元中，54%成为了管理费用（包括律师、专家和法庭）。涉及人为失误的索赔占据了总的管理成本的78%。
结论：缺乏证据（人为失误的证据）的索赔很常见，但大多数未能成功索要赔偿金。大多数的费用都花在了人为失误索赔的诉讼上和相应的赔偿金。有关渎职诉讼的管理成本是巨大的。
无论是在美国1，还是在其他国家2，3，4，关于医疗渎职的争论仍在继续。民事侵权改革的提倡者，包括布什政府的成员，慨叹“轻浮” 的渎职案件，并将其视为增加医疗成本的动因。5,6 (一个“轻浮”的索赔，是在没有证据和法律的支持之上的不理智索赔7) 原告的律师否认这一指控， 反驳道，偶然的费用和医疗人为失误的流行程度使得无意义的法律案件成为不好的生意或者是没必要的业务（这句话不确定翻译的正确与否）。8,9先前研究表明，在因疏忽而导致医源性损伤的患者中，大多数不会起诉。10,11 然而，诉讼索赔能够带来的好处以及渎职系统妥善处理他们的能力仍旧还很有争议.1,12,13,14 如果“轻浮”的索赔是常见的而且如此浪费的,他们就很有可能成为在医疗健康和司法系统中浪费的重要来源。

希望对你有帮助！

Answer 2

我们分析了盛行率、特点、诉讼结果,和成本宣称缺乏证据的错误。
结果为3%的索赔、没有可以证实的医疗伤病,37%并没有让错误。大部分的主张而产生的错误并没有联系(370 515)或损伤(31日37)也没有导致赔偿;大多数,涉及损害由于错误做的653 889例)。付款的索赔,不包括不常发生错误比反过来形式的不准确,欠交广告费情况下的索赔,伴随错误。当声称并不涉及误差补偿,付款平均显著降低比支付的索赔要求313,205美元错误(包括美元和521,560 P = 0.004).差异。总的来说,声称不涉及错误占百分之13到16岁的系统的总货币成本。花在每一美元赔偿,54美分去行政开支(包括包括律师、专家和法院的)。声称涉及错误占78%的总行政成本。
结论声称缺少证据的误差并不罕见,但大多数被拒绝赔偿。绝大多数的支出往诉讼在错误和付款。医疗事故的额外开销诉讼的昂贵。
医疗事故的争论在美国诉讼有增无减States1和其他countries.2、3、4提倡侵权的改革,包括布什政府的成员的负担、大声“轻薄的“医疗事故诉讼和引用他们作为动力costs.5上涨的医疗、6(一个轻浮的要求是:“现在没有理性论证基于证据或法律的支持,该请求。”7)原告律师反驳这个费用,反击应急费和流行,对医疗失误使追求meritless诉讼糟糕的经营和unnecessary.8、9
以前的研究已经知道,绝大多数o