In medical malpractice cases, the primary element that needs to be established is the standard of care, which refers to the level of skill and care that a reasonably prudent healthcare professional would have exercised in a similar situation.

Customary practice in the community is not a source of the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. The standard of care is based on what a reasonably prudent healthcare professional would have done, not on what is commonly done in the community.

Negligence per se is the legal principle that holds healthcare professionals to a higher standard of care in certain situations. It applies when a healthcare professional violates a statute or regulation that is designed to protect patients from harm.

Damages are not an element of the negligence standard of care. The elements of negligence are duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages.

Res ipsa loquitur is the legal doctrine that allows a plaintiff to infer negligence based on the occurrence of an event that would not normally occur in the absence of negligence.

In medical malpractice cases, the burden of proof for establishing the standard of care lies with the plaintiff.

Respondeat superior is the legal principle that holds an employer liable for the negligent acts of their employees.

Fraud is not a type of medical malpractice. Medical malpractice is a type of negligence that occurs when a healthcare professional breaches their duty of care to a patient.

Strict liability is the legal doctrine that holds a person strictly liable for harm caused by their abnormally dangerous activity.

In medical malpractice cases, the primary defense strategy employed by healthcare professionals is denial of negligence. This involves arguing that they did not breach the standard of care and that the patient's injuries were not caused by their actions or omissions.

The patient's expectations are not a factor that courts consider when determining the standard of care in medical malpractice cases. The standard of care is based on what a reasonably prudent healthcare professional would have done, not on what the patient expected.

Contributory negligence is the legal principle that allows a defendant to argue that the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to their injuries.

Lawyers are not typically called as expert witnesses in medical malpractice cases. Expert witnesses are individuals who have specialized knowledge or experience in a particular field and can provide testimony about that field.

Statute of limitations is the legal principle that bars a plaintiff from bringing a medical malpractice lawsuit after a certain period of time has passed.

Consequential damages are not typically awarded in medical malpractice cases. Compensatory damages, punitive damages, and nominal damages are the most common types of damages awarded in medical malpractice cases.