ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2021
Autopsy or anatomical dissection: evidence of a craniotomy in a 17th-eighteenth century burial site (Ravenna, Italy).
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The cranial capacity of the Saudi population measured using 3D computed tomography scans.Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2023Article
- Management of Aesthetic and Functional Deficits in Frontal Bone Trauma.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical procedures undergone in life, autopsies and anatomical preparations can all leave clearly identifiable traces on human skeletal remains. Several studies on skeletons from archeological contexts have identified traces of these practices. However, the distinction between medical/forensic autopsy and anatomical dissections for scientific research can be challenging. We report the case of a middle-aged female skeleton from the cemetery of the church of San Biagio (Ravenna, Italy), dating back to the 17th-19th centuries, that shows signs of a complete craniotomy. In an attempt to clarify the reason for this practice, we analyzed all pathological and non-pathological markers on the skeleton. We carried out anthropological analyses and osteometric measurements to determine the biological profile and the cranial capacity of the individual. Paleopathological investigation and analyses of traumatic injury patterns were carried out using both a morphological and a microscopic approach. While we observed that the craniotomy was performed with a rip saw, we identified perimortem blunt force trauma to the frontal bone and an osteolytic lesion on the inner surface of the frontal bone. No other pathology was recognizable on the skeleton. Our differential diagnosis confidently proved that the craniotomy was due to an autoptsy procedure and was not the result of an anatomical dissection. We believe that, among other possible reasons, failed surgery could likely be the motive behind the ordering of the autopsy.
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.