ArticleJournal of forensic dental sciences2014
Image manipulation: Fraudulence in digital dental records: Study and review.
Article in Journal of forensic dental sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Digital Smile Design.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2022Review
- Gatekeepers of the academic world: a recipe for good peer review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2015Article
- A simple working type Integrated Rugoscopy Chart proposed for analysis and recording rugae pattern.Journal of forensic dental sciencesArticle
- Digital image fraudulence: A curse to forensic odontology.Journal of forensic dental sciencesReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn present-day times, freely available software allows dentists to tweak their digital records as never before. But, there is a fine line between acceptable enhancements and scientific delinquency. AIMS AND
objectiveTo manipulate digital images (used in forensic dentistry) of casts, lip prints, and bite marks in order to highlight tampering techniques and methods of detecting and preventing manipulation of digital images. MATERIALS AND
methodsDigital image records of forensic data (casts, lip prints, and bite marks photographed using Samsung Techwin L77 digital camera) were manipulated using freely available software.
resultsFake digital images can be created either by merging two or more digital images, or by altering an existing image. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionRetouched digital images can be used for fraudulent purposes in forensic investigations. However, tools are available to detect such digital frauds, which are extremely difficult to assess visually. Thus, all digital content should mandatorily have attached metadata and preferably watermarking in order to avert their malicious re-use. Also, computer alertness, especially about imaging software's, should be promoted among forensic odontologists/dental professionals.
Indexed as
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.