In Susnis v. Radfar, 317 Ill. App. 3d 817, 827-29, 739 N.E.2d 960, 251 Ill. Dec. 27 (2000), the plaintiffs contended that had the radiologist properly interpreted an x-ray, subsequent doctors would have had the opportunity to treat the child's enlarged heart condition and possibly avoid or minimize her injuries. A review of the record established the plaintiffs' experts offered only an opinion on the radiologist's deviations from the standard of care, but no expert evidence was adduced to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the radiologist's deviations proximately caused the child's injuries. The Court affirmed the trial court's directed verdict in favor of the radiologist, holding the mere possibility of a causal connection was not enough to sustain the burden of proving proximate cause.