Defining the tasks of clinical reasoning in forensic psychiatric evaluation: Psychomedicolegal analysis competency

Natalia Widiasih Raharjanti, Diantha Soemantri, Tjhin Wiguna, Ardi Findyartini, Agus Purwadianto, Wresti Indriatmi, Elizabeth Kristi Poerwandari, Marlina S. Mahajudin, Nadia Rahmadiani Nugrahadi, Aisha Emilirosy Roekman, Ronald Leonardo, Adhitya Sigit Ramadianto, Monika Kristi Levania

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)


Objective: Inconsistency in the quality of forensic psychiatry report has been criticized for several years. Yet, there are limited guidelines to provide minimally satisfactory forensic psychiatry evaluation conducted by psychiatrists. In addition to the impact towards the forensic psychiatry service, this lack of standardized guidelines may impact the relevant competency development and its various teaching methods of forensic psychiatry among general psychiatrists. Therefore, this study aims to identify components of psychomedicolegal analysis competency as a form of clinical reasoning in forensic psychiatry. Methods: A comprehensive literature review and expert panel discussions were conducted simultaneously to formulate an initial list of psychomedicolegal analysis competency. A total of fourteen experts were chosen based on their expertise in different disciplines that have intersections with forensic psychiatry and the general psychiatry curriculum (e.g. general psychiatrist, forensic psychiatrists and psychologist, law practitioner, and medical education director). The expert panel were instructed to score and provide feedbacks on the items of the initial list. Four-point Likert scale were used in order for the experts to express the relevancy of the core competence to forensic psychiatry practice until it reached the consensus. Results: The final 60 items of psychomedicolegal analysis competency were developed after three rounds of Delphi technique and reached a consensus (>70% and medians score of at least 3,25). These competency then categorized into four steps 1) preparing the case (Item 1–11), 2) conducting the evaluation (Item 12–41), 3) writing the report (42–51), and 4) giving expert opinion in court (Item 52–60). Conclusion: We developed 60 items of psychomedicolegal analysis competency that can be used as a standardized guide for psychiatrists to conduct forensic psychiatry evaluation, write the report and provide expert opinion in court. Implementation of this guideline can be used to shape further forensic psychiatry education for general psychiatrist and psychiatry residency.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere14077
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2023


  • Clinical reasoning
  • Core competence
  • Forensic psychiatry evaluation
  • General psychiatrists


Dive into the research topics of 'Defining the tasks of clinical reasoning in forensic psychiatric evaluation: Psychomedicolegal analysis competency'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this