One third of these patients die, one third survives with a major neurological condition, and only one third survives in good condition; therefore shaken baby syndrome puts children at risk of long-term disability. The most frequent neurological impairments are learning disabilities, seizure disorders, speech disabilities, hydrocephalus, cerebral palsy, and visual disorders. Epidemiology
Small children are at particularly high risk for the abuse that causes SBS given the large difference in size between the small child and an adult. SBS usually occurs in children under the age of two but may occur in those up to age five. In the US, deaths due to SBS constitute about 10% of deaths due to child abuse. History
In 1971, Norman Guthkelch proposed that whiplash injury caused subdural bleeding in infants by tearing the veins in the subdural space. The term "whiplash shaken infant syndrome" was introduced by Dr. John Caffey, a pediatric radiologist, in 1973, describing a set of symptoms found with little or no external evidence of head trauma, including retinal bleeds and intracranial bleeds with subdural or subarachnoid bleeding or both. Development of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging techniques in the 1970s and 1980s advanced the ability to diagnose the syndrome. Legal issues
The Presidents Council of Advisers on Science and Technology (PCAST) noted in its September 2016 report that there are concerns regarding the scientific validity of forensic evidence of abusive head trauma that "require urgent attention".
Force
There has been controversy regarding the amount of force required to produce the brain damage seen in SBS. There is broad agreement, even amongst skeptics, that shaking of a baby is dangerous and can be fatal.A biomechanical analysis published in 2005 reported that "forceful shaking can severely injure or kill an infant, this is because the cervical spine would be severely injured and not because subdural hematomas would be caused by high head rotational accelerations... an infant head subjected to the levels of rotational velocity and acceleration called for in the SBS literature, would experience forces on the infant neck far exceeding the limits for structural failure of the cervical spine. Furthermore, shaking cervical spine injury can occur at much lower levels of head velocity and acceleration than those reported for SBS." Other authors were critical of the mathematical analysis by Bandak, citing concerns about the calculations the author used concluding "In light of the numerical errors in Bandaks neck force estimations, we question the resolute tenor of Bandaks conclusions that neck injuries would occur in all shaking events." Other authors critical of the model proposed by Bandak concluding "the mechanical analogue proposed in the paper may not be entirely appropriate when used to model the motion of the head and neck of infants when a baby is shaken." Bandak responded to the criticism in a letter to the editor published in Forensic Science International in February 2006. Diagnosis
Diagnosis can be difficult as symptoms may be nonspecific.