Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30483604›Full record

ReviewForensic sciences research2016

Research progress in the estimation of the postmortem interval by Chinese forensic scholars.

Chengzhi Li, Qi Wang, Yinming Zhang, Hancheng Lin, Ji Zhang, Ping Huang, Zhenyuan Wang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Forensic sciences research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. MicroRNAs: An Update of Applications in Forensic Science.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Chengzhi LiSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Qi WangSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Yinming ZhangSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Hancheng LinSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Ji ZhangSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Ping HuangShanghai Key Laboratory of Forensic Science, Shanghai Forensic Service Platform, Institute of Forensic Science, Ministry of Justice, PRC, Shanghai, China.
Zhenyuan WangSchool of Forensic Science and Medicine, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The determination of time since death or the postmortem interval (PMI) is one of the most important and frequently asked questions in forensic medicine. Medicolegal scholars and forensic pathologists around the world have studied the estimation of PMI extensively in the past, and many novel methods and advanced technologies have now been applied in the field. For several centuries, Chinese forensic examiners have also worked on the estimation of the PMI, and there are a large number of excellent studies published in Chinese rather than in English, and these are not easily accessible or known internationally. Therefore we have conducted a review of relevant studies published by Chinese forensic scholars in the last few decades. The scope of this review is to provide a concise summary of the current progress in the estimation of PMI by Chinese forensic researchers using molecular biology, spectroscopic technology, entomological methods, energy changes, thanatochemistry and other methods.

Indexed as

Chineseforensic pathologyForensic sciencemethodspostmortem interval

Identifiers

PMID30483604
PMCPMC6197124

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.