ArticlePopulation health metrics2010
Deaths of infants subject to forensic autopsy in Estonia from 2001 to 2005: what can we learn from additional information?
Article in Population health metrics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Injuries to the head and face in Brazilian adolescents and teenagers victims of non-natural deaths.The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeaths from childhood injury are a public health problem worldwide. A relatively high proportion of child deaths of undetermined manner in Estonia raises concerns about potential underestimation of intentional deaths, especially in infants. This suggests that more information on the circumstances surrounding death is needed to establish the manner of death correctly and, more importantly, to prevent these deaths. The objective of this study was to detect, describe, and analyze the circumstances around deaths of infants subject to forensic autopsy in Estonia to reveal hidden cases of child abuse and more accurately determine causes of death.
methodsStudy cases included all infant deaths in Estonia from 2001 to 2005 subject to forensic autopsy at the Estonian Bureau of Forensic Medicine. Additional information was obtained from a series of visits to general practitioners, including characteristics of infant health, family composition, parents' education and employment, living conditions, and circumstances around death as perceived by medical staff in charge of outpatient services for these families.
resultsThe total number of infant deaths in Estonia between 2001 and 2005 subject to forensic autopsy was 98, with 40 (40.8%) deaths attributed to a disease and 58 deaths (59.2%) resulting from injury. Elements of child abuse were involved in as many as 57.7% (95% CI 46.9-68.1) of the deaths for which medical records were available (n = 90). At death, the majority of these cases were registered as diseases or deaths from unintentional injury. Average annual mortality from external causes in Estonian infants, 2001-2005, previously reported by us as 88.1 per 100,000 (95% CI 68.1-113.6) would decrease to 41.0 (95% CI 26.9-57.8).Many infants in the studied group had faced multiple threats and were living in poor hygienic conditions. In a number of cases, they were left alone or looked after by older siblings. Parents' alcohol abuse played an important role in a considerable number of cases.
conclusionsUsing additional sources of information revealed new information about child abuse not reflected in the cause of death diagnosis. Effective interventions aimed at parent education and improved follow-up of children by medical staff may reduce mortality from external causes among Estonian infants by more than half.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.