MSc (Med), Child Health Neurodevelopment, University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Health Sciences / Background: Computed tomography (CT) was introduced 40 years ago and it remains an essential part of medical practice. The indications for CT brain scans vary in different centres depending on the availability of scanners and financial resources. There is no data on the indications and results of CT brain scans in children at Chris Hani Baragwanath (CHB) Hospital. Aims: The indications for CT brain scans were quantitated and the overall results of the scans were assessed. The rate of radiological abnormalities by referral diagnosis was evaluated. Methodology: 361 Children undergoing CT brain scans were identified in a four month period from 22/01/2004 to 21/05/2004, and their records were prospectively reviewed. Results: The ages ranged from 2 days to 14 years. There were 213 males and 148 females with a male: female ratio of 1.4:1. Seizures was the commonest indication for scans (25.8%) in this study. The six common indications (partial and generalized seizures, trauma, central nervous system [CNS] infections, macrocephaly and psychomotor retardation) accounted for 67.6% of the scans. There were 233 (63.5%) abnormal scans. Cerebral atrophy was the commonest finding, present in 58 (16.1%) scans. Discussion: A high rate of positive scans was detected in this study, with intracranial infections featuring prominently (9.7%). This high yield of positive scans in the study population suggests the need for more scanner facilities at CHB hospital. DPDoFcuments Complete Click Here & Upgrade Expanded Features Unlimited Pages

abstract: Neuroimaging has appeared in the courtroom as a type of `evidence' to support claims about whether or not criminals should be held accountable for their crimes. Yet the ability to abstract notions of culpability and criminal behavior with confidence from these imagines is unclear. As there remains much to be discovered in the relationship between personal responsibility, criminal behavior, and neurological abnormalities, questions have been raised toward neuroimaging as an appropriate means to validate these claims. This project explores the limits and legitimacy of neuroimaging as a means of understanding behavior and culpability in determining appropriate criminal sentencing. It highlights key philosophical issues surrounding the ability to use neuroimaging to support this process, and proposes a method of ensuring their proper use. By engaging case studies and a thought experiment, this project illustrates the circumstances in which neuroimaging may assist in identifying particular characteristics relevant for criminal sentencing. I argue that it is not a question of whether or not neuroimaging itself holds validity in determining a criminals guilt or motives, but rather a proper application of the issue is to focus on the way in which information regarding these images is communicated from the `expert' scientists to the `non-expert' making decisions about the sentence that are most important. Those who are considering this information's relevance, a judge or jury, are typically not well versed in criminal neuroscience and interpreting the significance of different images. I advocate the way in which this information is communicated from the scientist-informer to the decision-maker parallels in importance to its actual meaning. As a solution, I engage Roger Pielke's model of honest brokering as a solution to ensure the appropriate use of neuroimaging in determining criminal responsibility and sentencing. A thought experiment follows to highlight the limits of science, engage philosophical repercussions, and illustrate honest brokering as a means of resolution. To achieve this, a hypothetical dialogue reminiscent of Kenneth Schaffner's `tools for talking' with behavioral geneticists and courtroom professionals will exemplify these ideas. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Biology 2014