Forensic anthropology.

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.

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.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Pharmacological History of Missing Subjects: Perspective of a Correction Factor to Aid in the Study of Bone Remains.Biology · 2022
   Article
2. A new computer-assisted technique to aid personal identification.International journal of legal medicine · 2009
   Article
3. Sex determination from the foramen magnum: discriminant function analysis in an eighteenth and nineteenth century British sample.International journal of legal medicine · 2009
   Article
4. Validation of a physical anthropology methodology using mandibles for gender estimation in a Brazilian population.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as