Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29462950›Full record

ArticleGenes2018

Microbiome Data Accurately Predicts the Postmortem Interval Using Random Forest Regression Models.

Aeriel Belk, Zhenjiang Zech Xu, David O Carter, Aaron Lynne, Sibyl Bucheli, Rob Knight, Jessica L Metcalf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing 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

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

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

7 authors.

Aeriel BelkDepartment of Animal Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80525, USA. aeriel.belk@colostate.edu.
Zhenjiang Zech XuDepartment of Pediatrics, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA. zhx054@ucsd.edu.
David O CarterLaboratory of Forensic Taphonomy, Forensic Sciences Unit, Division of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Chaminade University of Honolulu, Honolulu, HI 96816, USA. david.carter@chaminade.edu.
Aaron LynneDepartment of Biological Sciences, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77340, USA. aml027@shsu.edu.
Sibyl BucheliDepartment of Biological Sciences, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77340, USA. srb009@shsu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4028-7224
Rob KnightDepartment of Pediatrics, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA 92093, USA. robknight@ucsd.edu.
Jessica L MetcalfDepartment of Animal Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80525, USA. jessica.metcalf@colostate.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Death investigations often include an effort to establish the postmortem interval (PMI) in cases in which the time of death is uncertain. The postmortem interval can lead to the identification of the deceased and the validation of witness statements and suspect alibis. Recent research has demonstrated that microbes provide an accurate clock that starts at death and relies on ecological change in the microbial communities that normally inhabit a body and its surrounding environment. Here, we explore how to build the most robust Random Forest regression models for prediction of PMI by testing models built on different sample types (gravesoil, skin of the torso, skin of the head), gene markers (16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA), 18S rRNA, internal transcribed spacer regions (ITS)), and taxonomic levels (sequence variants, species, genus, etc.). We also tested whether particular suites of indicator microbes were informative across different datasets. Generally, results indicate that the most accurate models for predicting PMI were built using gravesoil and skin data using the 16S rRNA genetic marker at the taxonomic level of phyla. Additionally, several phyla consistently contributed highly to model accuracy and may be candidate indicators of PMI.

Indexed as

decompositionmicrobiomepostmortem intervalRandom Forest regression

Identifiers

PMID29462950
PMCPMC5852600

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.