ReviewAcademic forensic pathology2016
Review of Postmortem Interval Estimation Using Vitreous Humor: Past, Present, and Future.
Review in Academic forensic pathology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postmortem Aqueous Humor Analysis in Pigs as an Index of Antemortem Serum Biochemistry Profile and Diagnostic Aid in Animal Welfare.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Detecting and subtyping ketoacidosis from metabolomic patterns in forensic casework.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Current Understanding and Future Research Direction for Estimating the Postmortem Interval: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- RedefiningFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Nanoscale potassium sensing based on valinomycin-anchored fluorescent gold nanoclusters.Mikrochimica acta · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErrata.2017
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For decades, forensic scientists have sought a means of estimating the postmortem interval using laboratory analyses. The best known of these attempts uses a linear regression formula based on the increasing concentration of potassium ions in vitreous humor following death. Like all laboratory analyses, the determination of a potassium concentration is subject to pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical errors. Any error is magnified when entered into a regression formula that itself is subject to statistical variation, typically with a 95% confidence interval. Estimating the postmortem interval based solely on the concentration of potassium in vitreous humor proved too simplistic for accurate modeling of the myriad factors that influence postmortem changes. Research continues, using more complicated algorithms involving multivariate ion and chemical analyses and genomic sequencing of the postmortem biome. However refined estimates of the postmortem interval based on laboratory analysis become, sound medical practice will still require the integration of scene findings and information concerning the last time that a given decedent was known to be alive with the results of postmortem examination and laboratory analyses into a medical opinion concerning the postmortem interval.
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.