Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed
carry fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds, they are
less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

One of my buddy's is a fan of the Glock 43, particularly for his wife.  I've been trying to talk him into a more "standard" sized 9 mm as I have seen people have trouble with the smaller pocket pistols.  For many reasons, and for both larger and smaller hand sizes.  I always wondered if the .380 had sufficient velocity to perform well and seems like the results were mixed at best. 

Other than the ballistic gelatin information, this article has a lot of "one man's opinion" when it comes to gun choices.  I actually like the Shield over the 43 or 42 and know many who share that opinion.  But most of that is personal preference as opposed to "real" experience with the gun.

Not just one man.  He also quotes the leading wound ballistic researcher in the world, Dr. Gary Roberts, who recently weighed in on the issue in a wound ballistics briefing for the FBI. His words are quoted in the OP.

Although the.380 ACP isn’t a ballistic powerhouse, I’m more worried about the reliability of the guns chambering this round than I am its lack of ballistic performance.  the gun has to go “bang” every time the trigger is pulled.  I haven’t seen many .380s that pass my standards for reliability.  If you are going to carry a .380, I would avoid the KelTec.  I’ve seen more problems with that gun than any other .380 auto.  I’d also avoid carrying the PPK or PPK/S if you want to use modern hollowpoint ammo.  Those guns seldom perform well unless ball ammunition is used.  Take a look at the new Glock 42 or the Kahr.  Those seem to run the best of the lot.  The S&W Bodyguard is usually fairly reliable, but the trigger pull is horrible and those of you with larger hands won’t like it.  The Ruger LCP has been hit or miss.  I have one that works very well, but I’ve also seen a lot of them puke on the range.

I was referring to the writer's opinion on gun selection.  Not the ballistic research.

You all can argue with me on this but I feel the .22 Magnum is a better self defense round than the .380. Is it acceptable? Not in my opinion. But if you have someone who is recoil adverse, why not get them a .22 magnum which has better stopping power and about the same or less recoil.

Personally, I feel the 9mm and .38 SPL are a minimum for self defense. But as a backup to your main defense weapon, a .22 magnum is a better choice over a .380 IMHO.

I can say with 100% confidence that if I were to get shot with one, I'd be on the ground.

I can say with 100% confidence that if I were to get shot with one, I'd be on the ground.

there should be a survey of people shot with different calibers
What questions should be asked?
On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the most pain.
How did it feel?
Would you most likely to comply after being shot with said caliber?

I recall reading somewhere that 22 lead all other calibers in terms of firearm deaths.  However, one thing to note that that figure includes suicides.

I also recall discussion from a medical perspective that 22 lr wound are notoriously difficult to treat since they sort of "meander" once they enter the body.  Since it's a small caliber, it can be difficult to trace it's path.  So it can nick an artery or something and it can take quite a bit of time to find it and stop the bleeding.

there should be a survey of people shot with different calibers
What questions should be asked?
On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the most pain.
How did it feel?
Would you most likely to comply after being shot with said caliber?