{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,4]],"date-time":"2026-05-04T03:21:14Z","timestamp":1777864874388,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":2,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2003,10,1]],"date-time":"2003-10-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1064966400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["J R Soc Med"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2003,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>At times a clinician must describe the size of a lesion when measurement presents difficulties. A \u2018guestimate\u2019 may then be recorded. We tested the accuracy of forensic clinicians (10 physicians and 1 nurse) in guestimating the sizes of ten test objects, comparing their performance with 13 individuals from other professions. The participants were permitted to handle the objects but not to use a measuring device.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>For three of the objects (a balloon, a scratch and a coin) the entire sample of participants significantly overestimated size, by 13-22%. Both participant groups overestimated the size of a scratch, the clinicians being more accurate but not significantly so.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Guestimates should be avoided unless the use of a ruler or tape measure will be against the interests of the client.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1177\/014107680309601007","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,11,23]],"date-time":"2017-11-23T03:53:41Z","timestamp":1511409221000},"page":"497-498","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":6,"title":["The Accuracy of Guestimates"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"96","author":[{"given":"Iain","family":"McLean","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Academic Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Manchester"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"C Mary","family":"Anderson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"St Mary's Sexual Assault Referral Centre, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Cath","family":"White","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"St Mary's Sexual Assault Referral Centre, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2003,10,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"bibr1-014107680309601007","first-page":"373","volume-title":"Perceptual Constancy: Why Things Look as They Do.","author":"McKee S.P.","year":"1998"},{"key":"bibr2-014107680309601007","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0042-6989(92)90201-S"}],"container-title":["Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/014107680309601007","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/014107680309601007","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,30]],"date-time":"2026-04-30T05:50:09Z","timestamp":1777528209000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/014107680309601007"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2003,10]]},"references-count":2,"aliases":["10.1258\/jrsm.96.10.497"],"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2003,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1177\/014107680309601007"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/014107680309601007","relation":{},"ISSN":["0141-0768","1758-1095"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0141-0768","type":"print"},{"value":"1758-1095","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2003,10]]}}}