20 CFR § 220.14 - Weighing of evidence.

---
identifier: "/us/cfr/t20/s220.14"
source: "ecfr"
legal_status: "authoritative_unofficial"
title: "20 CFR § 220.14 - Weighing of evidence."
title_number: 20
title_name: "Employees' Benefits"
section_number: "220.14"
section_name: "Weighing of evidence."
chapter_name: "RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD"
subchapter_number: "B"
subchapter_name: "REGULATIONS UNDER THE RAILROAD RETIREMENT ACT"
part_number: "220"
part_name: "DETERMINING DISABILITY"
positive_law: false
currency: "2026-03-24"
last_updated: "2026-03-24"
format_version: "1.1.0"
generator: "[email protected]"
authority: "45 U.S.C. 231a; 45 U.S.C. 231f."
regulatory_source: "56 FR 12980, Mar. 28, 1991, unless otherwise noted."
cfr_part: "220"
---


# 220.14 Weighing of evidence.

(a) *Factors which support greater weight.* Evidence will generally be given more weight if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

(1) The residual functional capacity evaluation is based upon functional objective tests with high validity and reliability;

(2) The medical evidence shows multiple impairments which have a cumulative effect on the employee's residual functional capacity;

(3) Symptoms associated with limitations are consistent with objective findings;

(4) There exists an adequate trial of therapies with good compliance, but poor outcome;

(5) There exists consistent history of conditions between treating physicians and other health care providers.

(b) *Factors which support lesser weight.* Evidence will generally be given lesser weight if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

(1) There is an inconsistency between the diagnoses of the treating physicians;

(2) There is inconsistency between reports of pain and functional impact;

(3) There is inconsistency between subjective symptoms and physical examination findings;

(4) There is evidence of poor compliance with treatment regimen, keeping appointments, or cooperating with treatment;

(5) There is evidence of exam findings which is indicative of exaggerated or potential malingering response;

(6) The evidence consists of objective findings of exams that have poor reliability or validity;

(7) The evidence consists of imaging findings which are nonspecific and largely present in the general population;

(8) The evidence consists of a residual functional capacity evaluation which is supported by limited objective data without consideration for functional capacity testing.

[63 FR 7542, Feb. 13, 1998]