What is the test for requiring expert testimony in a medical malpractice case?

competent as the expert to consider and weigh the evidence and draw the necessary conclusions, then the need for expert testimony evaporates.' [Citation.]" (People v. Torres (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 37, 47.)

If a trial court determines that expert testimony is necessary because a subject is beyond common experience, we will uphold that determination absent an abuse of discretion. (People v. McDowell (2012) 54 Cal.4th 395, 426 [concluding that "the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the jury was capable of evaluating" an issue without expert testimony].)