Analytical data supporting the "theoretical" postmortem redistribution factor (

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Postmortem redistribution of drugs: a literature review.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2024
   Review
2. Acute Quetiapine Intoxication: Relationship Between Ingested Dose, Serum Concentration and Clinical Presentation-Structured Literature Review and Analysis.Journal of xenobiotics · 2024
   Review
3. A fatal case of poisoning with a cathinone derivative: α-PiHP and its postmortem distribution in body fluids and organ tissues.Journal of analytical toxicology · 2023
   Article
4. Interpol review of toxicology 2016-2019.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2020
   Review
5. Analytical data supporting the "theoretical" postmortem redistribution factor (Forensic sciences research · 2016
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as