Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16633812›Full record

GuidelineInternational journal of legal medicine2007

Best practice in forensic entomology--standards and guidelines.

Jens Amendt, Carlo P Campobasso, Emmanuel Gaudry, Christian Reiter, Hélène N LeBlanc, Martin J R Hall, European Association for Forensic Entomology

Abstract readGuidelineReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in International journal of legal medicine, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 199 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
199citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

199 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. "Omics" and Postmortem Interval Estimation: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

139 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jens AmendtInstitute of Forensic Medicine, University of Frankfurt, Kennedyallee 104, 60596, Frankfurt/Main, Germany. amendt@em.uni-frankfurt.de
Carlo P Campobasso
Emmanuel Gaudry
Christian Reiter
Hélène N LeBlanc
Martin J R Hall
European Association for Forensic Entomology

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forensic entomology, the use of insects and other arthropods in forensic investigations, is becoming increasingly more important in such investigations. To ensure its optimal use by a diverse group of professionals including pathologists, entomologists and police officers, a common frame of guidelines and standards is essential. Therefore, the European Association for Forensic Entomology has developed a protocol document for best practice in forensic entomology, which includes an overview of equipment used for collection of entomological evidence and a detailed description of the methods applied. Together with the definitions of key terms and a short introduction to the most important methods for the estimation of the minimum postmortem interval, the present paper aims to encourage a high level of competency in the field of forensic entomology.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingAnimalsAutopsyDocumentationEntomologyEuropeForensic SciencesHumansLife Cycle StagesPostmortem ChangesSpecimen Handling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.