Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
is critical in discerning the source of a victim’s injuries by excluding other possible causes of injury. Further, this Court is satisfied a victim’s motive in making a statement excluding a possible source of her injuries is consistent with promoting her treatment for those injuries. Thus, Appellant’s claim that the answer did not meet KRE 803(4) is simply incorrect. Of greater concern is Appellant’s claim that the statement improperly identified him as the victim’s assailant. Under KRE 803(4), “the general rule is that the identity of the perpetrator is not relevant to treatment or diagnosis.” Colvard, 309 S.W.3d at 244. This Court has a long history of finding this type of hearsay extremely prejudicial when repeated by a professional on the stand. See Colvard, 309 S.W.3d at 247 ; Sharp v. Commonwealth, 849 S.W.2d 542, 545
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it was error to admit a videotaped interview of an alleged child victim of sexual abuse because the defendant was deprived of the right to crossexamine the child
B. holding improper admission of hearsay evidence is reversible error only when the admission causes prejudice
C. holding that the doctrine of harmless error applies when a due process violation is alleged and affirming a conviction when defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice
D. holding evidence of past uncharged sexual encounters admissible in child sexual abuse case to show relationship between defendant and alleged victim
E. recognizing extreme prejudice and reversible error due to physicians testimony repeating hearsay of alleged victim of sexual abuse identifying defendant as alleged perpetrator
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.