Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28785513›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2017

Use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation: myth or reality?

Damien Charabidze, Matthias Gosselin, Valéry Hedouin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Damien CharabidzeCHU Lille, EA 7367 UTML - Unite de Taphonomie Medico-Legale, Univ Lille, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9935-1956
Matthias GosselinResearch Institute of Biosciences, Laboratory of Zoology, UMONS - Université de Mons, Mons, Belgium.
Valéry HedouinCHU Lille, EA 7367 UTML - Unite de Taphonomie Medico-Legale, Univ Lille, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of insects as indicators of post-mortem displacement is discussed in many texts, courses and TV shows, and several studies addressing this issue have been published. Although the concept is widely cited, it is poorly understood, and only a few forensic cases have successfully applied such a method. The use of necrophagous insects as evidence of cadaver relocation actually involves a wide range of biological aspects. Distribution, microhabitat, phenology, behavioral ecology, and molecular analysis are among the research areas associated with this topic. This article provides the first review of the current knowledge and addresses the potential and limitations of different methods to evaluate their applicability. This work reveals numerous weaknesses and erroneous beliefs as well as many possibilities and research opportunities.

Indexed as

BiotopeBlow fliesCrime scene investigationForensic entomologyForensic pathologyLarvaeNecrophagousTaphonomy

Identifiers

PMID28785513
PMCPMC5543926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.